Make Armageddon more casual: Increase skill gain

[Yam]

#EndSkillShaming

[BadSkeelz]

That kind of sucks. Wisdom's my least favorite stat, if only because I feel like I'm cheating by not RPing an absolute idiot whenever I use it as a dump stat.

The rest of your post makes a lot of sense, Nergal. My own personal experience since the changes is that while my skills don't seem to go up much faster, my character's competency has.

Edit: As a corollary to the above, it's easy to feel that my PC is not advancing because his skills are still all at apprentice of journeyman. But this doesn't mean he can't make a good showing of himself in the field. The only real way to know whether your character is skilled up is to test those skills in "the wild." Sparring just doesn't allow for the same kind of judging.

Now, when we view our characters as $3600 investments in terms of time, walking up to a tembo just to see if I can take it on can be a little daunting.

[nauta]

Here's an idea: The Useful Casual.

The basic idea is you could roll up a useful minion/flavor role straight out of chargen.

o You'd have to play in a clan. (I think progression should be there for independents, although I'm on the fence since this would exclude raiders.)  
o If your character ever left that clan for whatever reason, you'd be stored.  (This is to prevent the abuse of someone getting the goods and then just leaving.)
o You'd be capped to low advanced in combat skills.  (Prevents jealousy.)
o You'd have no room for promotion.  (Prevents jealousy.  There is something annoying about playing a Salarri, say, and rooting for that promotion only to have someone pop in out of nowhere and get it.)
o You'd get a little staff note to the clan leadership that this character has been a Private/Trooper/Enforcer/At The Job for so-and-so many years (part of your background) and so is (more) trusted than some new guy off the street.  (Could be an animation.)
o You'd get (all?) skills set to low journeyman.  (Not sure.)

[Yam]

I like that.

[Reiloth]

I like that too.

#nautaforDNCnomination

[BadSkeelz]

I don't like the caps on promotions. I'd rather have a casual leader who's a good RPer and generator of fun than a 10-hour-a-day skill-grinding boring-as-fuck twink for a boss.

Otherwise I've advocated before for a "journeyman" PC who comes in to the game with useful skill levels and no means of advancing them. It'd let people who don't have the time or inclination skip the skill-up phase and get right to the doing phase.

[Desertman]

Here's an idea: The Useful Casual.

The basic idea is you could roll up a useful minion/flavor role straight out of chargen.

o You'd have to play in a clan. (I think progression should be there for independents, although I'm on the fence since this would exclude raiders.)  
o If your character ever left that clan for whatever reason, you'd be stored.  (This is to prevent the abuse of someone getting the goods and then just leaving.)
o You'd be capped to low advanced in combat skills.  (Prevents jealousy.)
o You'd have no room for promotion.  (Prevents jealousy.  There is something annoying about playing a Salarri, say, and rooting for that promotion only to have someone pop in out of nowhere and get it.)
o You'd get a little staff note to the clan leadership that this character has been a Private/Trooper/Enforcer/At The Job for so-and-so many years (part of your background) and so is (more) trusted than some new guy off the street.  (Could be an animation.)
o You'd get (all?) skills set to low journeyman.  (Not sure.)

You wouldn't count towards your clan leader's player cap for their unit/group/organization. You aren't around enough to "count", basically.

I only say this because when staff comes in and makes a leader clear their roster, casual players who aren't able to contribute as much are the first to go. I don't like it, but that is the reality. Clan leaders have to keep the people who are the most useful/around the most and dump those that aren't.

If I am a clan leader I don't want a special app casual-player underling counting towards my clan unit number cap when I didn't even get a say in if they got hired to begin with.

[Reiloth]

I think that's fair. Though I think it should be determined by Staff what 'casual' is, not by a player. Because I think they'd probably have a more objective view point of that.

Then again, if it is associated with this sort of 'role' thingy, it'd be assumed that they are a casual player, or at least someone less interested in skill grind.

[Desertman]

I think that's fair. Though I think it should be determined by Staff what 'casual' is, not by a player. Because I think they'd probably have a more objective view point of that.

I can tell you from experience this is an absolutely terrible idea (though I admit it would seem to make sense on the surface).....simply because staff doesn't know. The player leader knows because they are the ones actually running the clan and seeing who is and isn't actively participating in things that matter in the clan on a daily basis. Staff generally has no idea.

[Dresan]

I think the benefits of joining a clan serve their purpose in terms of skill progression.

In my case even more so because the moment I join a clan I stop giving a shit about progressing combat skill at all. I could care less if I'm good at combat or not, will probably be traveling in groups and be stuck somewhere safe the rest of the time. Would my character who just got this wonderful job really risk it by doing something stupid like attacking people on their own, probably not. And if I want to kill someone or someone wants to kill me, it'll probably be done in a way where combat skills are not a factor.  


I wish my ranger(and other classes) started with apprentice forage though.  That would be nice.

[Reiloth]

I think that's fair. Though I think it should be determined by Staff what 'casual' is, not by a player. Because I think they'd probably have a more objective view point of that.

I can tell you from experience this is an absolutely terrible idea (though I admit it would seem to make sense on the surface).....simply because staff doesn't know. The player leader knows because they are the ones actually running the clan and seeing who is and isn't actively participating in things that matter in the clan on a daily basis. Staff generally has no idea.

But how can a player check someone else's playtimes? Couldn't someone be playing just as much as you, but in GMT time zones? From what I understand, Staff can actually check how often someone is playing, not just assert their assumptions as universal truth (which is all a player can do, really).

Just because you aren't playing at the same time as someone doesn't mean they aren't playing (). It just means they aren't playing at the same time as you.

[Desertman]

I think that's fair. Though I think it should be determined by Staff what 'casual' is, not by a player. Because I think they'd probably have a more objective view point of that.

I can tell you from experience this is an absolutely terrible idea (though I admit it would seem to make sense on the surface).....simply because staff doesn't know. The player leader knows because they are the ones actually running the clan and seeing who is and isn't actively participating in things that matter in the clan on a daily basis. Staff generally has no idea.

But how can a player check someone else's playtimes? Couldn't someone be playing just as much as you, but in GMT time zones? From what I understand, Staff can actually check how often someone is playing, not just assert their assumptions as universal truth.

Unfortunately this is where you get into a grey area of OOC Feelings vs IC Usefulness.

OOC'ly I do not want to hurt this players feelings. In fact, so long as staff doesn't put the hammer down and force me to purge, I will let them stay around playing off peak for eternity just to avoid having to hurt their feelings.

IC'ly, they have zero value to me as a leader trying to accomplish goals since they aren't around when I need them to do things I need them to do. (Unless they are a hunter role or another similar role that can produce in a way where I don't need to actively oversee them. In such a case I would actively setup a system where I could monitor and reward them for their efforts and obviously would not purge them/count them as useless/inactive for the group. In fact I can think of instances where I have done exactly this.)

OOC'ly, my inclination is to let them stay.

IC'ly they are dead weight and even though they "are around" but not when my PC is they might as well not even exist for my purposes, and since I am the leader, my purposes are what will be gone by when it comes time to purge.

If staff wants to recruit an off-peak leader, more power to them, but I'm not an off peak leader so that's not my responsibility and/or concern. My concern is being a great leader when I'm available and keeping underlings who follow suit.

[Reiloth]

I think the benefits of joining a clan serve their purpose in terms of skill progression.

In my case even more so because the moment I join a clan I stop giving a shit about progressing combat skill at all. I could care less if I'm good at combat or not, will probably be traveling in groups and be stuck somewhere safe the rest of the time. Would my character who just got this wonderful job really risk it by doing something stupid like attacking people on their own, probably not. And if I want to kill someone or someone wants to kill me, it'll probably be done in a way where combat skills are not a factor.  


I wish my ranger(and other classes) started with apprentice forage though.  That would be nice.

I guess my postulation about 'just join a clan and it will take care of itself' is further accentuated by Desertman's position. If you aren't around, and you joined a clan, then you are just 'taking up space against the clan cap', leading to apparent frustration between you, the casual, and the leader in the clan. While I don't think this is actually the case, it does stand to reason that you make a commitment by being in a clan, to login regularly and interact with other clanmates. That isn't an unfair assumption -- But it can put stress on a casual player to commit time they may not have.

I admit that when I join a clan, I may be stoked about it the day I join, and feel like I do have enough time to commit to playing Arm. But then if I go a few days between logging in...I feel increasingly guiltier that I didn't/can't log in. And then after a week or so, I usually store because I feel bad that I took a spot in the clan.

So I think there are two sides to it, for sure. Clan caps (from what i've experienced) don't really come into play until there's like 13 ACTIVE ASS MOTHERFUCKERS in a clan. The one time Staff asked me to cap the clan I was running was in Tuluk, and we had something like 9 active people in it. It was just too much for such a small pond.

[Reiloth]

I think that's fair. Though I think it should be determined by Staff what 'casual' is, not by a player. Because I think they'd probably have a more objective view point of that.

I can tell you from experience this is an absolutely terrible idea (though I admit it would seem to make sense on the surface).....simply because staff doesn't know. The player leader knows because they are the ones actually running the clan and seeing who is and isn't actively participating in things that matter in the clan on a daily basis. Staff generally has no idea.

But how can a player check someone else's playtimes? Couldn't someone be playing just as much as you, but in GMT time zones? From what I understand, Staff can actually check how often someone is playing, not just assert their assumptions as universal truth.

Unfortunately this is where you get into a grey area of OOC Feelings vs IC Usefulness.

OOC'ly I do not want to hurt this players feelings. In fact, so long as staff doesn't put the hammer down and force me to purge, I will let them stay around playing off peak for eternity just to avoid having to hurt their feelings.

IC'ly, they have zero value to me as a leader trying to accomplish goals since they aren't around when I need them to do things I need them to do. (Unless they are a hunter role or another similar role that can produce in a way where I don't need to actively oversee them. In such a case I would actively setup a system where I could monitor and reward them for their efforts and obviously would not purge them/count them as useless/inactive for the group. In fact I can think of instances where I have done exactly this.)

OOC'ly, my inclination is to let them stay.

IC'ly they are dead weight and even though they "are around" but not when my PC is they might as well not even exist for my purposes, and since I am the leader, my purposes are what will be gone by when it comes time to purge.

If staff wants to recruit an off-peak leader, more power to them, but I'm not an off peak leader so that's not my responsibility and/or concern. My concern is being a great leader when I'm available and keeping underlings who follow suit.

I guess again, to each their own. I'm glad someone who is the diametric opposite to me in many ways plays the game, because it reassures me that I am not the only 'type' of player that plays this game, and it's a testament to the strength of the game as a whole that it can cater to two very different people/playstyles.

Personally, I was very enthusiastic to hire someone who had the opposite playtimes from me, when I played leader roles, especially Nobles or Templars. Not exclusively, but 1-2 employees in playtimes that venn diagramed with me once in a while, while the majority of the time were opposite, had great appeal to me. It allowed me coverage in areas that I had no influence in, because of my time constraints/playtimes. I found most of my effective Aides/Clan Players were in timezones different from my own. It's a different style of leadership from your own (in many ways), but that doesn't make one better or worse, just different. And, I believe that my style of leadership actually lends itself to more casual players/people in different timezones, because I don't feel the need to directly have a hand in their affairs/over their actions in order to be associated with them, or take responsibility for them.

It did mean I had less direct oversight over these PCs, and in fact, one of my Kuraci PCs was betrayed due to this kind of 'lack of oversight'. But it was worth the risk, and actually that lead to a fun series of events including Murder, Corruption, and Betrayal, simply for taking a risk on someone who didn't play at the same times as me.

[Dresan]

Reiloth, I think clans are boring, and don't join them because they are boring. I think the only criteria to being in a clan is just be around. There is an emphisis on -I- here, because I know others don't feel that way and thats great, personally I don't like others to dictate what fun I can have when I do log in but this discusssion isn't really about clans and really to each their own.  

Different clans offer different methods of progressing most skills, and i'm okay with that. Regardless of whether you are ever going to use them or not. Its not for me, but I'm okay with that.


As I said, I would just be happy with apprentice forage on my starting characters.

[Reiloth]

Right on, and I agree. The dictate of the mass politic (whatever Leader might be leading the clan) shouldn't affect your approach to clans or what makes clans fun to you (or not fun to you).

[Large Hero]

The change made a few months back to combat skill gain has made a huge difference in the rate at which characters advance in skill. While it still takes a long time to master a combat skill, it takes a relatively very short amount of time to achieve a level of competence in one. Additionally, offense and defense are hidden skills that were also affected by this change, and make a difference in combat as well - and generally speaking, combatant PCs I've looked at over the past few months have been gaining those skills a lot quicker as well - reaching competence (which is important for survival) quickly, and reaching mastery (which is far less important) a little less slowly.

So staff are definitely open to increasing the rate of skill gain, but it should also be understood that there's a balance to be struck. You have to consider that the faster a PC gains in skill, the faster they become powerful - even infallible, in terms of PvP conflict. Casual play at the moment doesn't suffer from an extreme disadvantage compared to more "dedicated" (for lack of a better word) play, because it can be counterbalanced by a casual player seeking out a challenging opponent to advance faster. Making skill gain faster would actually increase the gap between casual and "dedicated" players because the latter group would be able to get more skill-gains with the time they have to spend on getting them, leaving casual players in the dust even more quickly than they're left in the dust now.

Additionally, the more we increase skill-gains the less we make wisdom a factor in them. To be as frank as possible here, if you treat wisdom as a dump stat the effects of that are definitely felt in the long-term. I can't really get into code specifics but it suffices to say that wisdom really does what it's intended to do, and could maybe even be more of a factor in the future.

Good post.

[AdamBlue]

It would be cool as fuck to pop in as a nameless mook during a deadly event that killed your last character. Have any of you ever heard of the All Guardsmen Party?
It's Warhammer40k, but this is basically how they managed to get their roster of characters:
The DM had each player make around fifty characters. Low-level mooks.
Then, he put them through a ringer. He had them dying left and right, 'til only the toughest of the toughest mooks, three or four for each player, survived.
Now, they have their characters with backstory, skill, and ability to switch to another well-seasoned character should their current mook kick the bucket.
Personally, seems brilliant to me.

[Malifaxis]

Long time listener to the thread, first time poster.

First, Nuata, your idea makes me drool.  The Useful Casual.  It made my black little heart sing.

Secondly, Nergal, wisdom?  I could kiss you.  You and the rest of staff.  Wisdom has long been my favorite stat, and to know that it's actually being utilized more efficiently makes me randy, baby.

The tweaking of skill gains and the concept of The Useful Casual would end a lot of these worries, I think.

[Dresan]

Combat skills:

In my books if you can travel to luirs without having to run from raptors, you are competant. And if you can travel to redstorm without having to run from beetles you are a badass.  The length of time for a PC to become good enough to travel alone to luirs is one RL month at the most, but of course that depends depending on stats, PC skills available and knowledge. It used to be 0 months with skill boosts, but you still had to avoid from beetles.

Since travel promotes interaction and plots so its worth considering all the options available to players, including combat, but thats about it. I really think combat is fine the way it is, I think my merchant PC made me realize how trivial it can be in the grand scheme of things, even more so now with all the changes to the game.

Wisdom:

Putting combat skills aside, my only issue with wisdom is that if I have low wisdom it takes me 10 days to master skill. If I have very high wisdom, it takes me 10 days to master a skill.   The wisdom stat doesn't seem to take into account that some of us only have one chance per log in to train a skill.  

All that said, I mostly wish classes began with apprentice forage. I was waiting for the guild revamp since the staff was saying they would make a few small changes and give a few small boosts (hopefully forage), and they were discussing it but not sure if that is still happening anymore. The game seems to have gone in a slightly different direction with magickal sub-guild changes.

[Lizzie]

Reiloth, you say you prefer it when your clan-leader PC hires someone whose player plays opposite your play times, rather the same play times. What about the player whose PC you're hiring? I can tell you - the first character on my account was a ranger who got hired by a Salarri - and unbeknownst to me at the time, their player played from the other side of the planet. TOTALLY opposite play times. He just happened to be around that day. I can tell you right now if I had known then that I would be hired, with no tasks, no authority to make decisions or hob-nob with potential customers, no one to tell when something "important" was happening and needed the boss's attention ASAP, and (at the time) no one to pay me, no one to bring something to eat - I would have turned that job down. As it was, I ended up storing my character after two months of frustration.

I wouldn't wish that on anyone, especially not a new player.

[Miradus]

Joining a clan as a complete newbie seems like the worst possible way to learn the game, or your way around.

[RogueGunslinger]

Joining a clan as a complete newbie seems like the worst possible way to learn the game, or your way around.

Depends on the clan and the time. In my experience it's the best way to learn the game and find your way around. You know, because you're usually surrounded by others who know wtf is going on and are willing to help you.

[Gaare]

Probably Byn is the most important clan for a newbie or game in general. It teaches concept of time, routine, city laws, skill earning process and most importantly what rpi mud actually means. Also there are a lot of codes one must use in Byn. Also it is really hard to get used to combat screens of a mud and well.. Byn teaches that as well.

About skill gains. I think opposite of what title of the this thread suggests. I would lower speed of the skill gain. It may make people to play without checking their skills everyday. Slow process would mean more teamwork and interaction.

[Reiloth]

Reiloth, you say you prefer it when your clan-leader PC hires someone whose player plays opposite your play times, rather the same play times. What about the player whose PC you're hiring? I can tell you - the first character on my account was a ranger who got hired by a Salarri - and unbeknownst to me at the time, their player played from the other side of the planet. TOTALLY opposite play times. He just happened to be around that day. I can tell you right now if I had known then that I would be hired, with no tasks, no authority to make decisions or hob-nob with potential customers, no one to tell when something "important" was happening and needed the boss's attention ASAP, and (at the time) no one to pay me, no one to bring something to eat - I would have turned that job down. As it was, I ended up storing my character after two months of frustration.

I wouldn't wish that on anyone, especially not a new player.

I should have said a few more things, as I think you are misconstruing your personal experience with what I vaguely discussed as to what I actually do as a leader.

I always (when I was playing a leader):
- Make it clear what my playtimes are, when i'm at work, when i'm available, that I can be available off-peak or on peak with PMs/notices in advance.
- If I had a few employees, and this one was GMT or off-peak from me, would make it clear via OOC that I might not be around all the time when they are, but that X Y Z people are (or to check on the GDB forum for the clan to see when people were).
- I would make it clear that it was a trial, thus giving them an out if the situation didn't work out OOCly (I made this clear as well OOCly, for the reasons you mention above).

However, I found it very beneficial not to shut people out just because they weren't always playing at the same time as me. I also found that giving Aides or people of that level a certain autonomy, even allowing them to use my name to get things done, was very helpful and perpetuated my leader PC's presence without needing to be logged in 24/7. It also lead to interesting backlash plots, when people didn't take those Aides seriously because they weren't me, and I decided to either back up my Aide or not.

I would never hang another Player out to dry -- I tend to be very understanding on an OOC level, because this is a game, it isn't medici level politics or a novel-writing class people are paying for. If someone isn't having fun and they make that patently obvious, I typically let them go without too much fuss. If they do something retarded IG in order to get out of employment well...I also take things IG to be IG. There's a balance (as with all things).