Staff, I want an open dialogue.

[sleepyhead]

Geez, Lizzie, maybe I did all those things, but I deliberately said more than one time I don't want to make this about me and whether or not I deserved being force stored. Maybe I did deserve it. Maybe I pushed staff to the absolute brink of their patience and they finally felt there was no reasonable way out besides force storage. You can believe that about me and it doesn't change a thing about what I said. I'm here to talk about force storage and how it should be treated very seriously, not about my specific situation. The only reason I bring up my situation is because it led me to experience first-hand what the force-storage of a beloved character is like.

But if that's what happened, then force-storage was a perfectly reasonable resolution. When a player pushes and pushes, and the staff says "no" and the player says "why" and the staff answers them and the player says "but" and the staff says "Sorry answer is still no" and the player says "wait what about" and the staff says "no" - eventually the staff says "you're done."

I have no problem with that, and if that's what is happening, then I think it's working as it should.

My opinion is that force storage should be treated seriously and with a lot of gravity. I don't see why that has anything to do with whether or not I personally deserved to be force stored. If I was the only one ever to be treated brusquely regarding my character being stored, then great! I am happy with that. You are making it about me and I really never asked anyone to empathize personally with my situation, because they don't know it. My situation is done and that character is gone for good, but I'm trying to advocate for other players who will be disciplined with force storage who may or may not deserve it as much as I did.

[Armaddict]

the staff says "no" - eventually the staff says "you're done."

End correspondence, not IC characters.  Banning or storing for OOC communications is not in my 'ideal' camp either.  Just end the communication.

[lostinspace]

I too have had a character force stored. It didn't feel unfair, it seemed about right based on my actions. Perhaps my case was more clear cut, but it really didn't seem like a huge deal for me.

[sleepyhead]

My character was force stored for specifically stated reasons. Those reasons suggested staff believed my continued playing of the character could be potentially harmful to the game. So it wasn't just that staff wanted to teach me who's boss or punish me for bad roleplay--at least not on the surface, anyway. I can't read their minds or anything. I just want to put that out there for the sake of being fair to staff and not painting myself as the innocent victim of an unfair policy.

Regardless of my personal situation, though, if you go to the rules page it lists force storage several times as a potential punishment for things that do not necessarily have anything to do with a player's continued playing of a character being harmful to the game.

[sleepyhead]

I too have had a character force stored. It didn't feel unfair, it seemed about right based on my actions. Perhaps my case was more clear cut, but it really didn't seem like a huge deal for me.

Well, that's exactly one reason I believe the punishment to be unfair. For some players, and some characters, it's going to sting a lot more than others. I've played some characters that having force stored would feel like a gift. "Great, now I don't have to put in a request and wait." And some players have played a million characters and feel that way about all their characters these days--just a drop in the bucket. And some other players are a lot better at shrugging and moving on in general. And some players exhaust themselves emotionally with every single character. Staff doesn't (and can't) take that into account when force storing someone as a punishment.

[Molten Heart]

What a conundrum.  It seems staff observations of their dealings with the playerbase seem to be satisfactory. While some percentage of the playerbase advocates that it really isn't.

Both sides agree that airing out dirty laundry in public is less then warranted.  So instead the two polar opposite opinions are advocating themselves, but are incapable of providing anything concrete.

When things like that happen. The most common result is lack of anything changing. Would this be a correct assimption? Have this thread, the posts here, the messages aired, had it succeeded in changing/improving anything? Was anyone educated? Will anything change?

Note. I do not know if it "needs" to change. Does it?

Some organizations use customer satisfaction surveys to discover their users' experiences were. It's a good means of getting feedback on if they are doing a good job or not. There will be a lot of feedback that's not useful, but it's a good way to identify problems.

Though having staff be in more direct contact with players in addressing their concerns and needs would be more preferable. I understand personal direct contact, even through email/request tool exchanges may be beyond the scope of staff capability. The surveys seem like a realistic idea.

[Molten Heart]

I think it's important we remember the game is a collaboration between everyone involved and that while we may have different roles in the collaboration, the game is diminished without everyone.

[lostinspace]

Well, that's exactly one reason I believe the punishment to be unfair. For some players, and some characters, it's going to sting a lot more than others. I've played some characters that having force stored would feel like a gift. "Great, now I don't have to put in a request and wait." And some players have played a million characters and feel that way about all their characters these days--just a drop in the bucket. And some other players are a lot better at shrugging and moving on in general. And some players exhaust themselves emotionally with every single character. Staff doesn't (and can't) take that into account when force storing someone as a punishment.

While I agree that force storage will obviously affect people differently I don't see how that makes it unfair. WHO does it shouldn't matter at all, but rather WHAT was done. If there are just clear guidelines on WHAT behavior will result in force storage then that should be the end of it. As you said they can't take all of that into account anyways, so I don't see how it's unfair.

[sleepyhead]

If I had a few kids but only one of them cared a thing about playing video games, and I made a rule that if any of them didn't do their chores they'd lose video game privileges, it would be unfair because the two non-gaming kids would not give a crap about the punishment, whereas the one gaming kid would be very affected.

That's why I think that when possible, a choice between a temp ban and character storage would be nice. It wouldn't be ideal because yeah, there would be some people who would say "Store Amos; I was about to Silt Sea him anyway" while others would say "Temp ban me; I won't even notice because I'm about to go on vacation," it would prevent people being emotionally affected beyond what is reasonably intended by the punishment.

And if that's not possible, I've stated before that I'd be happy just knowing that when staff communicates that it's unfortunately necessary to store someone's (possibly beloved) character, they do it sensitively. I'm not saying write up a flowery epitaph about how great the character was and how Zalanthas will feel their loss, but something more than "we've decided to store X because you did Y" would be nice.

I think in general a temp ban more evenly affects people across the board no matter their emotional investment. No matter how much heart people pour into individual PCs, we know all players like to play this game and would probably be a little irritated by having the choice to play the game taken away for a while. You can also adjust the length of the ban as needed for different levels of severity, whereas you can't go "I'm going to store your next three characters" or "I'm going to store the next character that you care about." If the one being temp-banned broke a rule (which they probably did since they're being punished) then it gives them time to think about it (hopefully not just stew.)

[Yam]

I just felt like it wasn't treated with the gravity it needed to be treated with. Two lines informing me I was force-stored in a response to my character report. Request declined. Done.

This kind of thing sucks, for both parties.

I used to be the 'ban hammer' for World of Warcraft way back in the day.  I banned hundreds of players, and reviewed the bans of hundreds more when they inevitably appealed.   When people break rules they rarely own up to it.  They lie, they blame others, or they make empty threats.  The only thing you can rely on is the facts, and you can't always share the facts because then you're giving away your tools of detecting their rule breaking.

When I first started, I'd spend a lot of time writing each banned account a detailed message explaining why they were banned in as much detail as I could, showing them proof in the cases where wouldn't reveal our detection methods, and responding to their multiple replies.  After a little while on that job though, I found that despite all the effort I put into explaining things it rarely resulted in a better outcome so those responses got shorter and shorter until they eventually were just a copy/paste response and instead I spent all that time writing more detailed account notes for any other agent that might have to dig up this account in the future.

Given the scale of Armageddon, that jaded approach is certainly not the right answer, but I can totally sympathize with staff who've been doing this for a long time and have seen it all.

There's definitely an element of justified cynicism built up through interactions with a small number of players who manage to drive even the most coolheaded staffers to enraged madness. I think that cynicism eventually leaks out and covers the entire playerbase.

I don't blame staff for shifting to a hardline after repeated interactions with genuinely shit players. I just think something should be done to recognize and curtail it because it has been driving away non-shit players for several years now.

Edit: I don't think anyone is a shit player in perpetuity. We all go through shit phases and deserve multiple chances to improve after the shit phase has passed. I think staff largely does give shits second, third, fourth, etc... chances. I also think that staff sometimes goes into shit-mode against players who aren't being shits. This is one of the problems.

[Lizzie]

Well that's a shame. It's not legible even when I copied to MS Paint and enlarged it.

[BadSkeelz]

If I had a few kids but only one of them cared a thing about playing video games, and I made a rule that if any of them didn't do their chores they'd lose video game privileges, it would be unfair because the two non-gaming kids would not give a crap about the punishment, whereas the one gaming kid would be very affected.

That's why I think that when possible, a choice between a temp ban and character storage would be nice. It wouldn't be ideal because yeah, there would be some people who would say "Store Amos; I was about to Silt Sea him anyway" while others would say "Temp ban me; I won't even notice because I'm about to go on vacation," it would prevent people being emotionally affected beyond what is reasonably intended by the punishment.

And if that's not possible, I've stated before that I'd be happy just knowing that when staff communicates that it's unfortunately necessary to store someone's (possibly beloved) character, they do it sensitively. I'm not saying write up a flowery epitaph about how great the character was and how Zalanthas will feel their loss, but something more than "we've decided to store X because you did Y" would be nice.

I think in general a temp ban more evenly affects people across the board no matter their emotional investment. No matter how much heart people pour into individual PCs, we know all players like to play this game and would probably be a little irritated by having the choice to play the game taken away for a while. You can also adjust the length of the ban as needed for different levels of severity, whereas you can't go "I'm going to store your next three characters" or "I'm going to store the next character that you care about." If the one being temp-banned broke a rule (which they probably did since they're being punished) then it gives them time to think about it (hopefully not just stew.)

OOC Punishments like Force Storage should be reserved for OOC crimes - code abuse, griefing, or other disruptive behavior that cannot be explained away in IC terms. I would prefer people who run afoul of Staff in the request tool get temporarily banned so that their character remains hostage while they have the time to cool off and reflect. If a character is breaking the social rules of Zalanthas (including by being too powerful or just too fucking weird), I would absolutely prefer the game world come alive and put them in their place.

I'm going to use Tuluki sexual mores and their enforcement as an example of the downsides of force-storage. Not only is it more psychologically punitive towards players punished, it can be very disruptive to the immersion of players who aren't being punished.

In Tuluk, commoners, nobles, and templars all belonged to different castes. One of the big social taboos of Tuluk was that you could not have sexual relations across caste lines (except for slaves, since they're more furniture than people). It's my understanding that characters who broke this taboo would be force-stored. I never liked this course of action. I would much rather have the characters disappeared and killed in secret. While the fates of these characters appear identical from the outside ("Faithful Derp and Chosen Derpina have disappeared, don't talk about it), to the players involved I like to imagine the sting would be lessened. You, the player, are not being force-stored because you (The player) broke a rule, your character was killed because they broke a rule. The former is an OOC punishment directed at you; the latter is the natural result of playing Armageddon. We're trained to expect and celebrate character deaths as the result of their (really our) fuck-ups. It hurts at the time, but I hope we can all look back at our dead characters and laugh at the circumstances. ("Yeah, I didn't know what a spider nest looks like so I rode in to one" "Yeah well, I literally sexed myself to death!")

For the player-characters who knew the force-stored PCs, they're also less affected. They are given IC circumstances to react and respond to. You can roleplay with a body, you can't roleplay with a PC who is virtually still around but no longer a part of the narrative. It is very hard to roleplay around another character (a character that might  be very important to your own) suddenly vanishing for purely OOC reasons. This is especially important now: Tuluk at least had the IC tradition of disappearances to gloss over such punishments.

I think force-storage is especially stupid for when a character becomes too powerful. For GMH, Templars, and Nobles, sure, I can see some reasoning because there's supposedly not a lot of non-virtualized Tasks for Red Robe-equivalents to do in game. Debatable, but I can see the logic. But if a Sorcerer or Raider Boss or other rogue entity becomes so powerful we're told the only option is to force-store him? Why not animate something even more powerful and kill that PC? Even the most twinked out spam-casting skill-grinding sorcerer-mul-psionicist asshat is leagues below a Black Robe or Sand Lord or other offscreen Magickal Badass that are just waiting to be animated.

[Fathi]

For the record, I too have had a character force stored that I disagreed with and it caused me to take a break from the game for a few years. I'm comfortable airing the exact emails here, but honestly they're pretty boring and I've since mended things with the staffer in question.

I had a PC stored "for inactivity" when I had previously told my clan staff I was going away on vacation. In the middle of my vacation I got an email saying "why haven't you logged on for a couple weeks" and then shortly after, another that said "we're storing you for inactivity." I was so annoyed with what I saw as a basic inability to remember player communications/communicate with players that I didn't even appeal the storage and just didn't come back for a couple years. Or worse yet, I feared maybe they'd disliked me all along and were just waiting for an excuse to have me gone from the role.

Ages later, I talked to the staffer in question--now long since retired--on Facebook and he admitted he was going through some shit IRL and just straight up forgot my email about the vacation. He was mortified. This is one of those examples where people really do mean what they say when they say the request tool--for all its bureaucracy--makes things SO MUCH BETTER. My 2+ RL year played character would not have been stored if people had just been able to look up my last request and see "oh yeah Fathi said she's traveling for a while and will be back on this day."

The reason why I am posting all this now is not to stir up old drama--quite the opposite in fact, I've got nothing but fond memories of my interactions with this particular staffer since then. But it's a prime example of how one bad communication can lead to years of bad blood on a player's part.

I think it's a good thing for both players and staff to keep in mind when interacting with each other: staffers, sometimes you might forget things or overlook things or have your actions totally misinterpreted by players because of the necessary veil between players and staff.

I feared Staffer X was just a fucking asshole who'd been looking for an excuse to get rid of me all along and had callously disregarded my vacation so he had an excuse to store my character. I was so pissy I did not even ask for clarification. But I'm pretty sure my PC wouldn't have been unstored anyhow because by the time I got back from my holiday they'd apped in a replacement for her. So I may very well have become one of those jaded vets who never returned to the game because of a simple error.

If I had to suggest any sort of solution to the communication issues that seem to lead to a lot of player dissatisfaction (and I mean bad communication on the part of staff and players both, it's a two-way street) it's that perhaps there could be some sort of appointed staffer who's a "player advocate" or a staff member specifically assigned to assist in reviewing complaints alongside the Producers.

It'd be a rotating person whose job is solely to read over all the requests in question and provide feedback with a special eye toward the players' side of things. It might be more trouble than it's worth, but that's a position we have in the healthcare field where I worked for a long time. Every clinic has a patient advocate or someone who liaises between the doctors and insurance companies or patients and hospital admin staff to help untangle things and keep tempers from flaring when shit gets testy.

All I can really say is that in my personal experience, I have felt pretty personally wronged over stuff like that force storage and I'd probably still have a chip on my shoulder if I hadn't happened to Facebook it up with that staffer ages later. He messaged me like "oh my god, you played __ years ago! I loved her so much!" and it blew my mind because I was like "you LOVED her?? you stored me against my will you complete asscrack!"

I choose not to be salty about that screwup anymore because mistakes happen. But a pattern of mistakes--or a pattern of behaviour that leads toward players starting to feel over a period of years that they are being singled out--does deserve looking at, I think. I'm just not sure what the ultimate answer is.

[Raptor_Dan]

+1

Another post I have to agree with BadSkeelz on. IC actions should have IC consequences, and OOC actions should have OOC consequences. I'm one of those 'for the sake of the story' people, and when chars are killed off or punished for their actions, IG, it only furthers the story.


Edited to add: I just reread Fathi's post. I like the idea of a 'Player-to-Staff' advocate. I have a substantial amount of Karma, a char I really, really, really love playing right now, numerous kudos recently, (I only mention that because it makes me feel as I'm involving players and driving the game forward) and....

I'd be willing to give all of that up, and stop playing completely for the sake of transparency and non-bais, in order to be said advocate. I have years of customer service experience, and, imho, a good demeanor and attitude when dealing with both staff and players in my official helper capacity.

I'd stop enjoying ARM myself, in order to help others enjoy it more, that's how much I love this game. Should I send in a request, do this idea sound feasible or workable, or even like a good idea?

[Lizzie]

I don't see why a sorcerer who becomes THAT powerful can't build a new city, and become its sorcerer-king. Or try. Or even try to usurp Tek, or Muk Utep, or raise Steinal, or release Luirs Dragonthrall from his grave. Especially if his player involves more PCs in the attempt, and generates plotlines. Yes, it'll require that Storytellers have to - participate in the story. But that's probably something they would LOVE to do, isn't it? Rather than answer requests, make custom silk-and-ruby-engraved doilies for master merchants, animate random rat #47 for shits and giggles - wouldn't they WANT to bring Tek or a black robe or two to life? Or build a few Steinal rooms on the fly and let the Sorcerer and his minions find some of its remains? Or something really awesome and amazing like that? I know I'd be all over it, if I were a Storyteller.

[sleepyhead]

I do agree that force storage shouldn't be used in those cases, BadSkeelz. I'm iffy about it being used in cases of rule-breaking as well, except when it's deemed absolutely necessary to remove the character. But that's just my opinion and admittedly very biased by my own experiences.

But despite the fact that force storage is obviously a very personal issue to me, it's just symptomatic of what I believe is a focus that is too punitive in nature.

Sometimes good players do bad things and need to be reprimanded or disciplined. If you discipline them so harshly or coldly that they quit, you can say, "Well, I didn't ask them to quit. They made that decision."

At what point, though, do you have to admit you're partially responsible for the choice they made? Maybe you could have done something differently. Maybe you could have said something differently. Maybe you could have listened better and made an attempt to compromise or reconcile.

Or maybe you feel that you did as much as could be reasonably expected. Maybe the person was way out of line. Maybe any attempt to placate them would have been too lenient according to the rules. And the list goes on--take your pick. I guess the next question you have to ask yourselves as arbiters is: is it worth it? Is it enough to be "right" when being "right" is driving people away? If they got away with just a little more than they should have, but they stayed and contributed to a game that isn't exactly the wave of the future, might that be justifiable in its own way?

I'm not what I'd consider a great player, nor have I exactly quit, so I'm not talking about myself here by any means. There are others whom I know to be great players, though, who have quit because of staff interactions. I'm willing to grant that some of them WERE used to being treated with unfair favoritism and kid gloves, and they didn't like their dollies taken away, but even still I imagine something could have been done to ease their minds. I doubt all of them were unreasonable and unable to be pleased unless they were immediately given full sorcerer noble roles (exaggeration for comedic effect.)

We're a small community and I think we can make that into a strength. Staff here is able to listen to people and empathize with them a lot better than Blizzard admins. I'm sure it's emotionally exhausting to put forth that effort with every player, especially when some of them are jerks who rub it in your faces. And you know, many staff are wonderful at making me feel welcomed and wanted and I don't want to diminish that at all. But it only takes one or two terrible experiences to sour everything.

Sometimes we need things to feel a little...warmer, even when we're in the wrong. Sometimes especially when we're in the wrong, because we're feeling beaten down and humiliated and guilty. The request tool is cold by its very nature so I feel like going a little out of your way to make up for that would help. Maybe it's too much to ask given staff workload and the emotional burden they already have to bear, I dunno. But those are my humble thoughts on things from a player's perspective, never having had to deal with the stuff staff has to deal with.

[BadSkeelz]

I don't see why a sorcerer who becomes THAT powerful can't build a new city, and become its sorcerer-king. Or try. Or even try to usurp Tek, or Muk Utep, or raise Steinal, or release Luirs Dragonthrall from his grave. Especially if his player involves more PCs in the attempt, and generates plotlines. Yes, it'll require that Storytellers have to - participate in the story. But that's probably something they would LOVE to do, isn't it? Rather than answer requests, make custom silk-and-ruby-engraved doilies for master merchants, animate random rat #47 for shits and giggles - wouldn't they WANT to bring Tek or a black robe or two to life? Or build a few Steinal rooms on the fly and let the Sorcerer and his minions find some of its remains? Or something really awesome and amazing like that? I know I'd be all over it, if I were a Storyteller.

I think it has something to do with the fact that, while the game might just appear as text and simplistic mechanics to us the players, it takes a lot of fucking code work and time to actually add anything to the game world. When in doubt, blame Game Architecture, not Staff apathy. Even if it's not true I think it's a healthier state of mind to be in. We're making do as best we can, not stifling each other.

[lostinspace]

I don't even think of Force Storage as punishment, just removal of a character that shouldn't exist in the game. When I was force stored that was just because the character didn't deserve to be alive because I was being twinky. The karma I lost for playing that way was the punishment which is how it should be. I agree with BadSkeelz (for maybe the first time ever) post below and in fact all 1 of my force storages fell neatly into one of the categories he defined.

[BadSkeelz]

I don't even think of Force Storage as punishment, just removal of a character that shouldn't exist in the game. When I was force stored that was just because the character didn't deserve to be alive because I was being twinky. The karma I lost for playing that way was the punishment which is how it should be. I agree with BadSkeelz (for maybe the first time ever) post below and in fact all 1 of my force storages fell neatly into one of the categories he defined.

I would have thrown your twinky PC in to the arena or killed it with a mob, so someone could loot your shit. Wouldn't we want "shit characters" to be the fertilizer in which better things can grow than just flushed away?

I'm just not sure what the ultimate answer is.

Kill more PCs?

[sleepyhead]

I'm glad you shrugged it off so easily. It made me quit and my effort to come back has been half-hearted at best. Maybe the game is best populated by lostinspaces who can roll with the force-storage punches and not sleepyheads who cry when their dollies are taken away, but it's just the way I feel about it.

[sleepyhead]

For the sake of openness (hopefully not too much openness, though) the stated reason for my being force-stored was that I shared some IC information OOCly, and it was thought that due to who my character was, I would have far too much access to IC information that I might subsequently spread around OOCly. I know the big picture involved more than that and I hope no one is upset that I am giving an incomplete snapshot, but that was the reason for the force storage bit and when I inquired I was told that was all there was to that part of the punishment.

EDIT: I was also told that this particular kind of character was held to higher standards and I failed to meet those standards due to my communicating OOCly.

So I hope that proves that I am not here to portray myself as an innocent victim or misrepresent the reason I was force stored. I wouldn't be saying as much as I have said except it was brought up for me, but now that it's been discussed somewhat, I want to make sure that both staff and players know I'm not trying to play the woe is me I didn't do anything wrong card.

[lostinspace]

I don't even think of Force Storage as punishment, just removal of a character that shouldn't exist in the game. When I was force stored that was just because the character didn't deserve to be alive because I was being twinky. The karma I lost for playing that way was the punishment which is how it should be. I agree with BadSkeelz (for maybe the first time ever) post below and in fact all 1 of my force storages fell neatly into one of the categories he defined.

I would have thrown your twinky PC in to the arena or killed it with a mob, so someone could loot your shit. Wouldn't we want "shit characters" to be the fertilizer in which better things can grow than just flushed away?

The force storage happened after an attempt to kill me that I twinked out of, which is the reason I was force stored, I did unrealistic things that just happened to be inside the limits of the code.

I'm glad you shrugged it off so easily. It made me quit and my effort to come back has been half-hearted at best. Maybe the game is best populated by lostinspaces who can roll with the force-storage punches and not sleepyheads who cry when their dollies are taken away, but it's just the way I feel about it.

I play much less for other reasons that just aren't force storage related, primarily the removal of content like full guild witches and Tuluk.

[BadSkeelz]

The force storage happened after an attempt to kill me that I twinked out of, which is the reason I was force stored, I did unrealistic things that just happened to be inside the limits of the code.

I would have just given you uncurable Terradin as you fled. If staff want to kill your character, there will be no escape.

That probably would have worked on sleepyhead too. Though personally I don't really care about others sharing IC information (which I know is an opinion I do not share with Staff) simply because I don't see any information that can be passed along that can't be outfought with good skills and good stats. You can't skill up over AIM and if you kill me with poison or magick how am I to know it was coordinated? All the same to me.

Anyway, I digress. As long as information sharing is taboo, that's definitely a grey area that doesn't fall neatly in to the IC Crimes/OOC Crimes division.

Edit: I guess if you want to remove a character, staff, kill them. That's my recommendation.

[sleepyhead]

I thought the information I shared was rather harmless but it ended up causing a great deal of harm indeed. I knew I was breaking a rule, whether I agree with that rule or not, so I can't argue with being confronted and punished for it, but I don't think I deserved to have my character thrown haphazardly into the garbage with a two-line response to my character report. Even if I was about to store them out of shame anyway.

But it really isn't about me. It's about how staff (in my opinion) should try to shift to a more human and empathetic policy of dealing with people, even people they aren't pleased with at the moment, whether it's because they're breaking rules or being a thorn in their side or whatever.

[BadSkeelz]

What do you say to the people who already think we already have a pretty human and empathetic policy? If you had to write the storage notice to yourself, what more would you say that Staff did not? (I don't want you to answer, I'm just posing a hypothetical.)

It's funny how different we can feel about a situation when our seppuku is interrupted by another rushing in to the room and cutting our head off prematurely.