Player retention and you: brainstorming

[Delirium]

When this thread was made I was hoping to see constructive ideas come out of it. It started off great... hopefully we don't get bogged down in hyperbole and pointing fingers.

As for me, Laura and Old Kank pretty much covered everything I wanted to say. I do think visible, well-thought out story arcs are very important, as is giving a measure of control back to the players and continuing to add to and improve the areas of the gameworld. The rooftop additions made me so excited, I'm looking forward to what's next when that project is complete.

[Nyr]

Agreed, D.  I was hoping to get some other advice on what concrete things we could do, and there's plenty of that here, but maybe too much of the not so helpful stuff.

I've very much enjoyed the rooftop 3D-ifying as well.

[ibusoe]

I used to have a lot of friends who played role playing games.  I invited two or three of them to try this game, but then stopped because I ran into a problem.

Nobody wants to play a game where you can't link up with your friends.  Right now, it's way to hard to make something like a game family where you and bunch of your buddies can easily link up to go do crazy stuff together. 

The current rules are supposed to prevent people from effectively prevent out of game alliances from forming, however if this was seriously the intent then it would make a lot more sense to encourage people to register their alliances (for example, as a family) so that you can track these things.

By the time someone makes their third or fourth character in a row with their real life roommate, that would be an excellent time to have a chat with them about their long term interests. 

Being able to play with your friends should be streamlined. 

[Narf]

I used to have a lot of friends who played role playing games.  I invited two or three of them to try this game, but then stopped because I ran into a problem.

Nobody wants to play a game where you can't link up with your friends.  Right now, it's way to hard to make something like a game family where you and bunch of your buddies can easily link up to go do crazy stuff together. 

The current rules are supposed to prevent people from effectively prevent out of game alliances from forming, however if this was seriously the intent then it would make a lot more sense to encourage people to register their alliances (for example, as a family) so that you can track these things.

By the time someone makes their third or fourth character in a row with their real life roommate, that would be an excellent time to have a chat with them about their long term interests. 

Being able to play with your friends should be streamlined. 

This change would likely require an overarching change in Armageddon's core philosophy.

Personally it'd be one I'd support, but realize that these sorts of rules (if not their exact wording) have been in place for decades.

I remember back when I was in college some fifteen years ago my friends and I all put together a little elf tribe that was loads of fun until we all got eaten by a wandering Mek. It was horrifically against the rules, we even all played in the same house together at the same time. But it definitely allowed us to get people playing that never would have played on their own.

That said, I know some people have gotten really screwed over by OOC collusion and they could probably tell you the darker side of this sort of thing. Personally I've been lucky enough not to be targeted by this sort of thing.

[Dresan]

The fact that Adhira has been thinking of shifting the focus of this game from mindless grinding of skills to a game where you as a player can just focus on RPing your character's life, is probably the best news I've heard since extended sub-guilds/skill bumps.

You get rid of that initial grind before a character becomes decent enought to do things with, and you'll attract so many people who current feel they don't have the time to invest in this game.  Not to mention have less threads asking for more plots from staff, because people will be feel more confident of attempting plots themselves and getting others involved.

[Inks]

...I'm out.

[Old Kank]

Some thoughts on plots and story arcs, because I think that's tremendously important for keeping players interested:

• I love the idea of chapters or seasons, but ONLY from an administrative (and perhaps historic) point of view.  If the staff doesn't already have a story arc ROUGHLY planned out, they should.  It doesn't have to be detailed, or railroad tracks, or anything like that.  Just a basic outline of what's happening with the major players.  Tectonic shifts in the political world, disruptions in the elemental forces, major bad guys looming just outside the Known.  Things like that that the minor players (clans) may be able to respond to.


• I wonder, is the staffing structure conducive to advancing story?  Creativity by committee may not be the best route.  Was the old one staff, one clan system better in terms of competition?


• Some of the staff-driven stuff that I've seen lately has been mostly high-brow Game of Thrones stuff.  Political machinations, assassinations, powers shifting.  That seems really interesting on paper, but seems to lack the meat I'm hungry for.  I can't imagine it does anything for the average character that's not a templar or noble.  I missed the Black Robe event, so maybe I don't know what I'm on about.


• I want armies, bad guys, treasure, and other cheap, low-brow fare.  If you want to appeal to players who have grown bored, cynical, or burned out, give them something to get into with a 2 hour character, rather than something that requires 50 days played to subtly appreciate.


• I feel like players are too stingy with their scheming.  I THINK this may be the big dividing line I'm trying to find, but I'm not sure.  A lot of those old, big, really awesome plots were pushed by CLANS, and not just a single PLAYER, so all you had to do was be in the right clan, or the right geographic area, and you could get involved.  Now I feel like you have to be chosen to get involved.


• Players shit on the gypsies for their waterslides and perceived staff favoritism, but they were selective for player quality at a time when some of the playerbase was not so great, and they were able to get a lot accomplished.  Is there a benefit to putting several good players in the same basket?

[Adhira]

The idea of 'seasons' for plots is a good one, and one that we actually implemented in the game around 3 years ago.  It's hard to sustain when staff drop out though, so we need a method that makes it easy for people to pick up where others left off. This is the reason we ask staff to write up their plots on the idb and post progress reports there. This is the 'red tape' that players seem to rail again, but if staff don't do that, that is when we either lose a plotline or story arc, or we get things mixed up and wrong and the players feel like we've changed the direction on them completely and (often rightly) they rail against that.

It's not an excuse. Story arcs and overlying plots for the game as a whole are great and Admin and STs do work on these, but I wanted to give some perspective on why there can be lulls in this area. I know from looking at our boards that the staffing team has a lot going on, or a lot in the works that they wish to do. The implementation and timing of these is entirely up to the individual staffer and generally that is directly related to their amount of free time. If you haven't seen things in game, then keep an eye out. One thing that we need to work on is how to clue in and get players involved in plots in a way that makes in game sense, but is better than we do now. Right now we hope for the trickle down (or up) to take effect and drag people in, we've erred on the side of caution when using NPCs to push people to get involved due to the large backlash we had a few years back about 'railroading' characters and only making them play out our storylines, instead of letting them do their own. As a response we moved to putting out crumbs hoping they'd get collected, and not forcing issues if players didn't seem to want to eat them.  It seems the pendulum is swinging in another direction now, so we can reassess and try and find a happy medium there.

[Delirium]

I think also, beyond year-long "arcs", what Armageddon needs is a malleable version of the "5 year plan".

What direction is the game going in? Where should the stories take us? What do we want to accomplish both OOC and IC?

What are our goals to keep the MUD sustainable and the player-base interested and active? Economy, plot, code goals?

Stuff like that.

[Delirium]

Another thing that definitely needs to happen is an audit/examination of the shops & merchants in Allanak.

If we are making that our primary playerbase area and cramming upwards of 50 PCs in the same city, we'll need more merchants and/or a faster rate of VNPC purchase.

I recommend a lot more of the same kind of merchants, with lower buy prices across the board, and the ability to sell anything anywhere for at least 1-2 sids.

There are also a lot of "flavor" shops that see almost 0 traffic due to the weirdness of their prices (a certain pastry/candy seller comes to mind).

[Delirium]

And another idea!

You should be able to quit anywhere. Period. The only people that end up being punished by the inability to quit anywhere in the game are casual players.

Pros:
Groups of people can go out into the wilderness on long trips together regardless of class
Encampments can set up and dismantle at will regardless of quit-rooms
Casual players no longer need to fear being trapped far from a login area (you can't use quit OOC twice in a row)
Casual players will log in more and play a wider variety of roles
The need to flag quit rooms becomes obsolete

Cons:
Wilderness becomes far more accessible to non-combat or city-based classes


Honestly, the only "con" I see, which I've listed above, is counterbalanced by the fact that the wilderness is fucking deadly.

[zanthalandreams]

I guess I qualify as a veteran player who has given up on being retained beyond more than just a casual log-in.   (though, hell, ask me in a year and that may change)

There are a couple of reasons why, though probably the biggest ones are out of anyone's control.   I've played for almost two decades now, give or take a year or two off.  What drew me to the game over all the other myriad muds out there was the impression that one didn't have to be on staff to make an impact on the game world.   Granted, it took a bit of submission and a healthy relationship with your clan imm, but it was do-able.   There are, or were before the world shrunk, rooms that I could walk into that were there because I wrote them, I submitted them.   [Edit here:  Adhira & Mekeda are two clan imms that were instrumental in making that happen.  Whether I was a leader or a peon under their oversight, I never really felt micromanaged or constantly denied.  Nor did I feel like I had to stroke an ego in order to make an impact.]  Clan documentation that included my input.   Certain concepts of the game that I helped to shape - whether it was a special rank/position within a clan or a name/phrase/slang that caught on.   There's even a tribe I helped to keep alive.

Whether or not it was really me is irrelevant.   It felt like it was.   Most of that has been, um, discontinued I guess is a good word.  Closed.  Inaccessible.  Retconned out.

I distinctly remember when it was announced from on high that Arm2.0 was on and everything else would be abandoned.   I was sitting in a hotel room, chilling with a drink in my hand and I just suddenly realized how ephemeral was the vessel in which I was pouring my creativity.   Sandcastles below the tideline.   Even though it was a creative medium that I would return to from time to time, the forced impermanence had a strong dampening effect.

Then when that, too, was abandoned - I let myself get sucked back in.   Gravitating to clans I once loved and doing my best to recognize the subtle nuances of favorite veteran players through their characters.   Again, whether or not it really was the same folk or not is irrelevant.  It felt like it was and they were fun to play with.

I had some solid, strong characters and really felt like they were amazingly effective and interesting.  Not just for me, but for the players I interacted with.   Gleefully, with bright eyes and eager to end-cap the long-lived characters with reading some good account notes - I would submit to read them.

And nothing.   Or, worse than nothing, a neutral-negative comment as the only marker.   Sandcastles, right?    I'm not a GDB Superstar, I figured, nor do I always remember to file my paperwork through background and other dear diary notes.   Fair enough.  [Edit 2:  In fairness, I did get some positive feedback from a couple of character reports, though, that was inspiring but ephemeral.  Notes are forever, it seems.]  

So to ask what would bring this player back is hard to answer.  

The most fun I've ever had in the game not only didn't involve the Imms, it was sometimes in spite of them.  I don't mean that in a hostile or negative way, only that when decisions made by the folks who run the game adversely affect my character or my fun . . . it has sparked me moving them in directions I never expected.  Destroy my character's entire tribal encampment?  okay.   Force me to become a licensed contractor no longer working for my lifesworn employer?   welllll....okay.    Lock my home city off of the game?  *sigh*  Alrighty then. . .  

In all of those situations, and others like it, I found other characters in the game that were dynamic and interesting and offered at least something of a niche for me to fit into.   All of those other characters wore dazzling coats with long tails upon which to ride.  Maybe -those- players were the ones who figured out how to navigate the waters of continued imm support and attention?  Don't know, maybe they were just better roleplayers than me.  

You can sniff out a veteran player quicker than you can sniff a guild.  

But I meander away from answering a question, I think.

What would bring this player back to more than just logging in every other game year or so to smack something with a bone mace, get bored, and log out for another month or three:

*Obvious support of character-led initiatives.  I hated having to wait around for an NPC to animate just to give me marching orders.  The most fun I've ever had was being the right (or left) hand peon of some wild-eyed hungry PC leader.  Even (especially) when it got me killed.  I guess here is where the perspective of whose game it really is comes in.  I'd argue that it belongs to the players.  Mudconnect can point you to any number of player-less muds that belong to an Imm.

* Intentional cultivation of veteran players.   Some of the changes recently point to that.  I really like, for instance, the way special apps are heading.  Would be even better if it was automated.  Maybe even after X amount of approved characters/X amount of karma - remove the approval process completely.  Really, after about ten years or so of playing this game you'd think at least some folks could have earned the ability to just FastPass generic dwarf ranger +151

* Hand over controls of the clans to the players.  Let them make or break it.   Step in as Undying Senior Patriarch Bosszilla only if it starts getting stupid.

* I'm not so concerned about apologies from people I couldn't pick out of a crowd, but there really isn't a vibe of open dialogue.  Even as I write this I wonder if I am going to regret writing out an answer.   Maybe is best to just keep lurking and try to make my own subtle fun within the confines of whatever whoever is running the game this year.  

I'll think more on it and maybe edit later.   Never really thought about what would make me come back playing like I used to play.  

There's a part of it, too, that just can't be helped.  Playing Pong isn't as fun today as it was when I was a kid.

[Dresan]

This is something I touched upon my post on skill grind but...Right now it feels like we are really dependent on clans, staff/ roles sponsored by staff to get things done.

And while I want to focus on the skills grind for now because the is my greatest hump to overcome before I feel I can begin contributing in this game, I know that it isn't the only one for other people.

Other people have mentioned there are other road blocks that prevent people from attempting stuff. The IC powers in this game are too strong. GMH need to be toned down in terms of dominance, and stuff like sorcerer kings needs to be removed completely. This has been said before but its not the player's power ceiling is too low, its just that the virtual power ceiling is way too freaking high. Its funny because removing or changing these things doesn't necessarily change the way we play. The only different is that these changes will allow people to dream big again, to plot big along side staff. 

I am not saying that staff still don't need to have year long story plots that are fed to the players gradually, or 5 year plans on where to take the game story-wise like Delirium suggested, that would help the game so much. However staff need to make sure players have the ability from creation to begin to plot and accomplish some fun and wonderful things, that will improve the game for everyone playing. Basically players need to be encouraged to attempt more plots for themselves and not depend staff them for enjoyment.

[Rokal]

Honestly, one, one major thing, I want to see more.

is the ability to -adventure-. Small plots, minor plots, let players create the idea behind a fun adventure, maybe an indie wants to go exploring out to find some ruin.. a staff decidcated to minor adventure plots works with the indie, making out some sort of rough idea of the adventure - it might be a three or four room little ruin with neat things left behind, ect. . Improvised adventure RP is some of the best there can be.

I still have a ton of the game to explore, but things like this could open up a new avenue of fun for newbie players and veteran's alike.
Armageddon is an RPI, but its also a game. Let people have their fun with crazy adventures. Those alone create stories and things to RP around.

I enjoyed the adventures my first character had. If more stuff like that could happen on a smaller scale, I think people would be attracted to it.

Not everyone is on arm to play the political plots, or the antagonistic plots. Some people just want to get out there and challenge the unknown itself. Another major thing about these adventures and the world is that yes - its low fantasy. But Magick is a part of the world. Some of these adventures involving magick in ways can add a level of depth that makes the game feel like a proper fantasy world.

I'm sure some of you have memories of a group of six friends and adventures as characters, each with their own little niche that makes them apart of the team. in previous RPs, or D&D.  Some D&D Rps have plot, but most people don't remember it for the plot or what happened at the end. They remember it for what the characters went through, what they DID together. how that halfling rogue managed to pick the lock to the door in the nick of time before that crazy lich-wizard blasted the scariest fireball you've seen at the group. Or that lawful good paladin being at odds with the lawful evil sorcerer but understanding each other to a level that it winds up being a good cop/bad cop duo.

Now I wana try and put in a request for some ideas like this :<

[ibusoe]

Honestly, one, one major thing, I want to see more.

is the ability to -adventure-. Small plots, minor plots, let players create the idea behind a fun adventure, maybe an indie wants to go exploring out to find some ruin.. a staff decidcated to minor adventure plots works with the indie, making out some sort of rough idea of the adventure - it might be a three or four room little ruin with neat things left behind, ect. . Improvised adventure RP is some of the best there can be.

This.  Lots of this.

[wizturbo]

The IC powers in this game are too strong. GMH need to be toned down in terms of dominance, and stuff like sorcerer kings needs to be removed completely. This has been said before but its not the player's power ceiling is too low, its just that the virtual power ceiling is way too freaking high.

The day Armageddon doesn't have wicked sorcerer kings or their equivalent, is the day I stop playing forever.  I don't care if some of them are overthrown, and replaced with new powers...but taking sorcerer-kings out of Armageddon is like taking the Jedi/Sith out of Star Wars.  Some people might like Star Wars without the Jedi/Sith, and I won't fault them for having that opinion, but I'm not interested.

[Armaddict]

ZalanthanDreams:

I call it a static sandbox, much like your sandcastles beneath the tideline.  You get to create and influence things, but in the end, the game can't change -too- far, and that's really the only logical way for it to be.  If player-desired change happens willy-nilly, it either outright changes the setting, or progresses the setting beyond a point of maintaining the setting.  Because that's the sort of thing that players like to work on.  Things that progress the game world.  Thus, I view the changes made as taking parts in the changes that still maintain that setting (and thus being notable, more than game-changing).  It's a sandbox, but it's a sandbox that we can't make bigger, put too much more sand in it, or bring in any of those digger-setups that let you pretend you're a tractor in them.  It has to be a maintainable atmosphere within the setting, or else the game loses part of the identity that was the attraction in the first place.

Players can make impacts.  Making impacts happens all the time.  But you need to focus it on how you impact players and stories, rather than impacting the entirety of the known itself.  Don't look to make a new fortress that will last until the end of time with your name on it, to your credit.  Instead, make a camp of PC's out in the wilderness that actually survives.

For Staff:
-Support those sort of small scale plots, those things were players are banding together to influence their own place in things.  It does not require changes in the game world.  Sometimes it requires code innovation, but every time you code something, it's a benefit to the playerbase at large.  Everyone can now engage in a similar plot in the future.  I hear a lot of 'I can't make an impact', and I think it's a misguided statement.  I don't think anyone truly expects to leave gigantic footprints (or if they do, they might favor other methods of storytelling), but it goes a long way for there to be minor staff interactions and nudges and basically 'open' shows of support for minor plots.  Likewise, run your own small plots, consistently.  Desertman talked about this some.  It's less about sweeping world change, particularly to the new player, and more about 'Holy shit, things are happening!'.  There was once a movement among players for them to be more in control of plots, and it ended up being listened to.  Staff used to run plots constantly, players criticized it (much to my chagrin), and a newer form of 'stand back' was adopted over time.  This, I think, put staff in a position more akin to an approval board than the movers and shakers of the game that they are.  I think it may have made your job feel like everything needs to be so tightly constricted that you're less willing to let in the idea of the static sandbox.  Let small changes happen.  They can unchange later.  Make your own small changes that promote 'Holy shit, things are happening!' for at least a small group of PC's.  Salters, beware this week!  'rinthers, this this happening!  It's not RPT's.  Just make little temporary blips in the static, but consistently.

-Stop snarking.  Armageddon has never been a democracy, ever, and I don't know where that somehow filtered in.  Players provide feedback on things, and pool together ideas, but this game has ultimately always been run by staff.  It is -their- votes and designs that count.  That is okay, that is not a gripe.  But the open discussion and push for 'Everything that players want, they should get' will subject you to constant criticism from all directions, and is why the GDB can feel like a very hostile place.  However, whether it be in the privacy of a request, a GDB post, or in email...if you are worried about retention, you cannot afford to belittle people even unintentionally.  It doesn't happen often, but whenever I do see Snark, it's one of the most disheartening things for me, coming from an era where staff used to put their foot down -real hard- to me in emails, but at the same time maintained a very cordial, polite, and real invitation to continue to enjoy the things being set up for our enjoyment. The only exceptions to this were when I raged out on things, in which case even I couldn't deny that I had some harsh words coming.

-Be humble.  I know that sounds strange, but just read on through.  Realize that a lot of the game is far from perfect, and frustration comes with it.  A lot of your projects are not perfect.  A lot of your plots are not perfect.  A lot of your plans are not perfect.  Embrace that idea, because I have seen personally situations where there are implementations and systems you put up -for us- to enjoy, which we are very grateful for, but that doesn't mean we can't spot problems that aren't working exactly towards the purpose of that system, and yet a critique of said system pointing out why is either brushed aside without further attention or rather defensively reacted to.  This is unnecessary.  As staff, you are the bird's eye view of the game and are by far the most qualified to dictate what is and is not helpful to the game.  However, there are also players that are uniquely positioned or involved to be able to give you valuable data that you need to make adjustments.  Please accept that data.

For Players:
-OOC Collusion:  Someone brought this up, wanting a system in place to 'register' for.  I don't consider it a bad idea to inform them of OOC circumstances, such as roommates and such, but at the same time...I think this is more on the players.  Inevitably, you will make friends in this game.  Through clans, hangouts, whatever, it happens.  It's on the players to be responsible here.  A few years ago, there was a player who used to talk with me pretty constantly during play.  Things as specific as 'Oh, I'm here doing this.  I'm fiddling with this item to try and do this.'  This is OOC info, but not particularly damaging as long as the players are responsible about it.  With that same player, when I revealed something from my background, the response was 'Noooo, now I have to pretend not to know that which will be hard!'.  The point being:  OOC collusion is damaging when you, the player, make it that way out of some need for advantage.  Talking about the game is incredibly fun, and will help other players stick around when they can brag about their recent changes in the static sandbox.  But you have to make it your responsibility to keep it non damaging.  I realize this flies in the face of the NO OOC TALKING GUYS rule, but I'm pretty much resigned to the idea that there are friends talking to each other about this game, and that's actually a great thing for some people to be able to nerd out on the game with someone else who understands.  But staff can't regulate it.  We have to.

-Jading each other:  Stop it.  This ties in with the above.  People tend to get jaded because over the course of time, there -are- going to be unpleasant experiences, either with staff, with other players, or with the game setting/world.  We have an amazing game that we obviously all enjoy or we wouldn't be here.  There's that rule about campsites, where you leave it better than you found it.  Consider that same rule for the game, but in the realm of social interactions.  Yes, I am guilty of toxicity and vitriol as much as anyone else, I'm not saying this in a condescending way.  But it really is damaging to the morale of the playerbase to have even other players, not just a staffer who has a different priority, talking about all the terrible things in the game that they -don't- enjoy instead of pointing out the things they're still doing for fun.  When someone new joins up and browses the board...I hope they see impassioned arguments between people who care a lot about the state of the game, and not a bunch of people quibbling about how their part of the game is more important than everyone else's, or how terrible this system is.  But I'm not optimistic.

-Be creatively helpful to newbies:  I don't mean just true-blue newbies, this is a push to my other veterans.  We have 'figured things out' with experience.  We have noticed code quirks.  We have lost characters to stupid mistakes.  There are other people who have even played the game for a good amount of time but just haven't been exposed to this sort of knowledge.  While we can't share this sort of thing on the GDB, we -can- have our characters involved in the welfare of other PC's that we notice suffering from this.  Find creative ways to explain it in the game to someone, because sometimes the 'Ah, that's how that works!' or 'Wow, that's good to know' is a big part of enjoying the game.  Having it figured out through the game, rather than explained in a straightforward 'this is how the code works' fashion is also more satisfying and gives that accomplishment feeling that most players strive for.

Cooperative Competition:  This is a cooperative storytelling game, but with an autonomous world constantly updated and interacted with via code.  The setting of that world is not a friendly one.  We, the players, can be friends, but our characters will often get in the way of each other in pursuit of their own goals.  Come to terms with the idea of this, because it is not an assertion that my plots and goals are more important than your plots and goals, it's a reality that my character is going to do what's best for them, even if it makes me feel like an asshole to you on a player-to-player basis.  People will kill each other.  People will fuck up your plan so that theirs can succeed.  It's going to sting, it might infuriate you, it might make you cry, if you're one of those.  Accept the fact that despite our cooperation in forming this web of stories and plots and our own desert Game of Thrones, there is very real competition that will be led in a realistic way that preserves that atmosphere.  The harder we push for the OOC understanding of 'Let's be nice about it', the further this understanding that the game wants to kill you and PC's are not a party of D&D adventurerers goes away.  The understanding on an OOC level does not need to be 'Hey, your plots are important to you and we should all foster each other's plots', because we all already understand that and know it and embrace it.  But that does not always fit into the game.  The understanding needs to be emphasized that zalanthans are not people bound by modern moral codes, and sometimes we'll get in the way of each other.  Cooperatively, we can make it fun so far as we still maintain that level of competition that brought the conflict into being.

Take Risks:  I talk about this a lot.  There is a risk aversion among us.  This makes sense, it really does.  But it also lowers the danger experience of the game.  I won't say we're all here for it.  But I will say that Armageddon is the only game that can -inject- adrenaline into me in the blink of an eye.  That is an amazing feeling, when you manage to come out the other side of it.  It's a terrifying feeling.  The sudden chance of loss of your character makes you appreciate the character and what it has and what it does.  When we live in a safety net, that appreciation can quickly fade into a feeling of monotony and boredom.  Risks exist in the game, risks are presented, and there are often payoffs that -require- risk, but no one feels like tackling it until that safety level has been reached.  There was a leader I (relatively) recently interacted with that roped me into some incredibly risky situations.  In game, they weren't always-smart- decisions.  But on the OOC level, that makes the attachment to the character, and to the game.  So please, please...don't make your goal 'live forever', make it 'find that thing no one else knows where it is, then profit' or 'become known for this'.  Risks make the game, and is the beauty of living vicariously through the game in a very dangerous world.


There's a whole lot more.  But I'm rambling now, and this is probably too long already.  Maybe more later, but I think it's important to note this is about retention, not an invitation to poke and prod about personal gripes with this person or that person.  The derail into another player/staff divide thread will not retain players.  I feel the divide is -just as much- the fault of players holding grudges over relatively minor ordeals in the long run.  The focus of retention is making experiences enjoyable, and the divide focuses on interactions that are not the majority of experiences within the game.

[Inks]

Oh good we are back to talking about a static gameworld which players have little perceived effect as being the problem. I approve.

I really liked your post, ZalanthanDreams.

[zanthalandreams]

ZalanthanDreams:

I call it a static sandbox, much like your sandcastles beneath the tideline.  You get to create and influence things, but in the end, the game can't change -too- far, and that's really the only logical way for it to be.  If player-desired change happens willy-nilly, it either outright changes the setting, or progresses the setting beyond a point of maintaining the setting.  Because that's the sort of thing that players like to work on.  Things that progress the game world.  Thus, I view the changes made as taking parts in the changes that still maintain that setting (and thus being notable, more than game-changing).  It's a sandbox, but it's a sandbox that we can't make bigger, put too much more sand in it, or bring in any of those digger-setups that let you pretend you're a tractor in them.  It has to be a maintainable atmosphere within the setting, or else the game loses part of the identity that was the attraction in the first place.

Oh, to slip on those slopes and fall splashing into the tide.    I mean, okay, I guess.   Not complaining about it any more than I complain about the weather outside.  Not something I can control any more than any other independent volunteer character-actor in this mutually nurtured artificial reality.  (A truly thankless job, let me tell you, but not without its rewards sometimes.)  They did ask, though.  My answer really doesn't require agreement or instruction. 

I but look on as a very, very minor player and wonder rhetorically how well that's working and toward what goal?   

[Jihelu]

I've read things that said people weren't allowed to install a door despite money/materials.

It's a door.
Come on.


I also just want to use a sword.
Not currently cause that'd be meta.
But come on.

Also I'm drugged up right now and in pain so we'll see if I don't say stupid shit soon.

[Armaddict]

Well.  I'd say that historically it worked very well, in tandem with Player plots and influences.

Recently, less so, because as noted...there was a time where there was a criticism made against staff controlling plots and only their plots getting attention, and staff agreed to step back and leave it to players, which has made for an environment where...well.  Let me link it.

-Support those sort of small scale plots, those things were players are banding together to influence their own place in things.  It does not require changes in the game world.  Sometimes it requires code innovation, but every time you code something, it's a benefit to the playerbase at large.  Everyone can now engage in a similar plot in the future.  I hear a lot of 'I can't make an impact', and I think it's a misguided statement.  I don't think anyone truly expects to leave gigantic footprints (or if they do, they might favor other methods of storytelling), but it goes a long way for there to be minor staff interactions and nudges and basically 'open' shows of support for minor plots.  Likewise, run your own small plots, consistently.  Desertman talked about this some.  It's less about sweeping world change, particularly to the new player, and more about 'Holy shit, things are happening!'.  There was once a movement among players for them to be more in control of plots, and it ended up being listened to.  Staff used to run plots constantly, players criticized it (much to my chagrin), and a newer form of 'stand back' was adopted over time.  This, I think, put staff in a position more akin to an approval board than the movers and shakers of the game that they are.  I think it may have made your job feel like everything needs to be so tightly constricted that you're less willing to let in the idea of the static sandbox.  Let small changes happen.  They can unchange later.  Make your own small changes that promote 'Holy shit, things are happening!' for at least a small group of PC's.  Salters, beware this week!  'rinthers, this this happening!  It's not RPT's.  Just make little temporary blips in the static, but consistently.

Basically, the idea of 'Yeah, PLAYER PLOTS FOREVER' was originally thought to mean that they could just do everything they could think of.  But that doesn't work in a multi-player game that has to be maintained for everyone, and over a long period of time.  So as those drastic sort of plots got put down over time, people were more and more discouraged and it turned into this 'Man, we can't do anything'.  That's the same as the original feeling, but now without people motivated to do it on the small scale, and without the enjoyment of the once-consistent larger arc activities.

This is the main trouble of the game, I think.  Me, I survive it very well, because I know that large changes -can- be made, but it's a hard process that fits with the game and requires some luck, some good places and times, and a lot of work.  I don't think this game is about having a freeform sandbox, and I think that the idea that it was designed or 'supposed' to be one is the misconception.  This doesn't have to destroy what it is, though, if the focus is shifted to what it does allow you to do.  Have a rich, static world with very deep culture and existence coded and played in...and a bunch of other people to influence, compete with, join with, steal from, protect, and so on.  The changes are on the scale of the stories.  Those are the big impacts you make.  Not on the scale of changing where the story takes place, because other people have to be able to tell their story after yours.

Modified to add:  I'd like you to stay, ZalanthanDreams .  But I do think a lot of the problem isn't with the game.  I don't think 'Man, Arm has changed so much.' Things have been added or removed, but the game itself remains pretty close to how it's been, as far as function. I think the expectations of players has, though, based off of an egocentric point of view.  In other words...it's become more about how the game can accomodate each of us, rather than how can we use this coded structure in here to play a character.  That's what we came here for, was roleplaying.  We have people who talk about loving to play insignificant people.  Beggars.  Playing the surprises.  How much they enjoy it.  But we -lose- people who are under the impression this isn't about playing what you want, it's about -doing- what you want.  I'm not sure if that's a distinction that will result in good things or bad things, but that makes sense in my head.

[Jingo]

I feel more often than not, the snark is a lie.

[Jihelu]

Nah but really though I just want to paint things.

[picklehead]

I haven't read any of the posts in this thread, but I played this game a long time and quit several years ago due to time constraints:

Remove the glass ceiling. Make player interactions matter. Make player efforts matter and support them! Let them change the world!

People play games like this to get an escape from reality and ROLEPLAY something else. Let that happen. Encourage it. If you put up roadblocks at every turn players are going to get frustrated and give up. Time is a limited resource. Things shouldn't be easy, I get that. But change shouldn't be impossible. If you structure a world where no amount (or too great of an amount) of time and effort will ever be enough to change said world, players will walk away. This is the sort of game where players want to write a story for their characters. They want to write a chapter that might end up in the (imagined) book. If you remove that possibility or make it so hard that it will almost never be a reality, people are going to spend their time elsewhere.

[Centurion]

More rambling! Sorry in advance.

Remove the limit on ALL clan caps and such (if it hasn't been done already). If Noble A wants to hire on an army of followers to serve under him who are all dedicated soldiers, let them. As long as they can pay them from their own wage and not a npc paymaster, it should be fine. If noble A then wants to go and take on a tribe in the distant west because suddenly some valuable plant has been found, let them. Then maybe the other nobles will hire on armies, and they might fight for this special plant, and then alliances might be formed with noble A and noble C to fight against noble B. The Byn might get involved as well. Sure, they can be hired by noble B to help, but then the Byn sergeant might face the wrath of noble A and C and end up dead, and a replacement might come in who is loyal to noble D... and so on and so forth. While having a main story arc in the background is great, it's the little things which admins can just CREATE that players can't, and have placed in the game world are the key to getting many players involved and having daily fun. These plots shouldn't need to have RPT's, they should just be happening all the time to keep people wanting to log in so they don't miss out.

Examples

*Rare beasts loaded in appropriate areas which might contain a magnificent hide when skinned, instead of just the standard one. Or stronger, sharper claws for better weapons. You get the picture. Maybe a small rumour finds its way to a PC who spotted the rare sighting, maybe not. It could be as simple as creating the mob, loading it, and dropping into the world, and let the players find it, fight over it all they want. Don't do this just once a RL year either, keep it frequent, but random. I know I'd be keen to go hunting daily if this sort of thing was happening.

*Gold, Silver, Bronze... small amounts can be uncovered and maybe set in place, and then it's up to PC's only to go and fight for it. It is mostly a desert world, storms could unveil just about anything long ago buried. I know this sort of stuff is meant to be rare, but from the past few years it's been practically just non existent. You add a little more to the game world, and people will go crazy over it and fight for it. If Amos the grebber finds it by some fluke, and manages to safely keep it but ends up dying somewhere remote and no one knows, then who cares. Maybe at least for that one guy he felt really special for a little while as he had it.

*Artifacts. Famous people in history, and their weapons, armour, tokens and such surfacing in the world for people to claw over, learn off, and so on.

*Magical cursed items. Maybe they can't be dropped, and give stat decreases or something similar. Then these people finding them would need to seek out mages for help.

*More lone wolf bandits or those in groups loaded in places around the Known to try and raid PC's as they travel. Even give them distinct colours if they are a bandit group, and they become more of a constant thing and target for militia and other military clans hired to track down to kill them and keep the roads safe. There should be bandit groups popping up all the time, which is easy to do with NPCs, but for PC's it is so difficult due to the time it takes to invest to get good, against how quickly it is to just get wiped out by having EVERYONE suddenly gunning for you. Make more cave rooms, hidey holes for such things so it's not just "Oh, they left Tuluk heading east to hide out?" We all know a certain cave which is more than likely the spot they went too, instead of having to consider 4 or 5 caves, which should be more reasonable.

As for skills, I don't want to see them go up any faster. I like the idea of certain characters after a great amount of work standing out from those who don't put in that work. While it might give an advantage to those that play more, it's just something to accept, as they will be the people who benefit more from many other things. If you want to become a death machine warrior, then play more. However, I think raising the starting levels might help a little for new PC's to survive the struggles. It will keep players on par, but give that little edge against NPC's/Mobs.

I touched on this before, but having something like the 'Elite Warrior' Guild, which might cost 3 Karma, and will set all combat skills at like apprentice, and maybe a couple at journeyman, might allow staff to spend less time reviewing special applications for extended sub guilds, as this process doesn't require anything more than standard approval, unless you had 6 karma and wanted to be an Elite Warrior/Outdoorsman extended sub guild for example. I feel adding new guilds might actually take a bit of work, but it would definitely be worth the extra time you would save in the long run. The same principle could be applied to all the other guilds, but with an elite version. This wouldn't be necessary though if the GCP system was finished and coded into chargen. It could be a quicker fix though?

Making wealth actually mean something. The player created clans is a great feature added. Grebber Amos who might be wealthy, can't really spend his coin on much because he's just a shitty grebber. No Kadian wants to sell him a fancy emerald necklace because they'd rather sell it to noble A, who will earn them the coin and the favour. So if Amos wants to show off bling and look important and become powerful, becoming his own merchant house will allow him to do that. That is a long way down the track, but it's a long term goal. He can still probably buy great weapons, armour, and jewellery, but he just generally can't have the best, at least not showing it off in public without the proper status to back it up. What about a GMH merchant though, what can they dream for? Why should they be working so hard to earn 20k sid, or 40k, or 60k? What can they buy with it that makes them feel special? What players can actually do is probably not so limiting, but generally they might feel it is, and don't bother to try for it because they don't think it will succeed. Maybe it's time to come up with a more public list of what they can buy or achieve for x amount of coins. Maybe becoming a GMH Agent simply requires 5 years of service, and spending 10k to buy your way into the family. Then you need another 15k to buy your own place within the estate. Then if you want another room it costs another 5k, and then you need to furnish it. Adding on a few rooms to an estate is easy work as a builder, and something so easy can mean the world to this one PC. Some people really love to play 'House'. I know I do. Just imagine if Nobles could even buy their own estates. Not just have one family estate where 20, or 50, or 100 of nobles of the ONE House live in all together. Then they are the noble player created clans. Maybe even these nobles can pay 100k to form their own blooded family name, and become separate from the Houses already in game. Then it really can become Noble Houses vs Noble Houses. If a noble wants to buy a slave for 20k (as an example), just let them. Maybe 300 coins gets taken off their monthly pay or something to explain the living costs to keep it. Next, if the noble wants the slave to be a PC, let them put out a role call in player announcements. If the person gets bored of the role or stores or whatever, that's the risk the noble took and the player of the slave, and they should wear it, but they should have the option. More options please.