Player-Staff meeting

[Shabago]

We're looking to pull all of you, regarding the title of the thread. Is there active interest in a player-staff meeting to be had?

A portion, if not the full dedication to the meeting will have to do with Halaster's thread for Game Feedback. Should there be enough interest, the likely time period will be a mid-day Sunday, so most time zones can participate.

Discuss + Yay/Nay your interests.

[mansa]

I always want a gathering of players/staff !  YAYYAY

[Veselka]

Absolutely yes. I think the last time was around the time Classes were introduced/put in game.

I think centering around Game Feedback and perhaps a short presentation of 'What We as Staff Agree with and Aim to Change' sort of mission statement would be welcome for sure.

Sundays are good!

[Dar]

Only if there is at least one death.

[Halaster]

Only if there is at least one death.

I see we have our volunteer.

[Strongheart]

Yay for midday on Sunday!

[mansa]

Question #1:
Primarily, what does the staff want to accomplish with the story of Zalanthas and the game of ArmageddonMUD ?


Question #2:
What do the staff want the players to accomplish in the story of Zalanthas and the game of ArmageddonMUD ?


Question #3:
a) Is there an appetite to increase the number of new players that we have in our game? 
b) What steps can we, as players, do to increase our numbers?


Question #4:
a) What are a few of the reasons that there is a lot of staff turnover?
b) Once someone becomes a staff member, and they don't have the time/effort to do that anymore, do they go back to being a player or do they stop playing altogether after 'peeking behind the curtain'?


Question #5:
How can I share the stories of my characters with other players of the game?

::edit grammar::

[Gentleboy]

How exciting!

I'll try my best to attend, Sunday is best for me.

[Bogre]

I'm for it.

[Barsook]

Yay for midday on Sunday!

[adri]

Absolutely up for this.

[9001]

Only if there is at least one death.

I see we have our volunteer.

A Player-Staff meeting without at least three deaths is considered a dull affair.

[Dar]

Only if there is at least one death.

I see we have our volunteer.

A Player-Staff meeting without at least three deaths is considered a dull affair.

Second Volunteer.

Who's our third?

[Halaster]

Only if there is at least one death.

I see we have our volunteer.

A Player-Staff meeting without at least three deaths is considered a dull affair.

Second Volunteer.

Who's our third?

You.

[Strongheart]

Nou.

[Dar]

Only if there is at least one death.

I see we have our volunteer.

A Player-Staff meeting without at least three deaths is considered a dull affair.

Second Volunteer.

Who's our third?

You.

I'm the first one.

[lairos]

Yup

[Iiyola]

Totally interested in this. It's been a few years since the last one!

[TragicMagick]

I'd like to see this.

[mansa]

If you can't make the meeting (Oct 10th, 2 PM EST as per https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,57263.0.html )

You should post your questions in this thread here, so they can be addressed!

[triste]

A lot of people love this game but barely have time to play due to increasing demands IRL. Does staff plan to invest in features or policy changes which might make this game more playable for an increasingly busy playerbase?

[Dresan]

A lot of people love this game but barely have time to play due to increasing demands IRL. Does staff plan to invest in features or policy changes which might make this game more playable for an increasingly busy playerbase?

This would be my question too.

[mansa]

Here's a log of the player/staff meeting from Discord:

Shabago:
Welcome to the October 2021 Player/Staff Meeting. If you have a question, type "I have a question" in the queue channel and you'll be called on when you're up to ask a question. The queue opens up at 1:45PM and will close around 3:00PM or when all questions are answered. We will start at roughly 2pm after allowing some to queue up. (All times are server time). As posted The main topics will be in regards to Halaster's Game-Feedback thread, the games direction and our community.

Shabago:
Thank you to each of you already lining up for questions. Let's get into it! @A wild Zeia appeared.. You were first up.

A wild Zeia appeared..:
Good evening/afternoon/morning lovelies!

Is there, or could there be any plans to look in to the karma regen timer?
I know it has been brought up many times because of the long wait between it.  If you make a HG that dies within a week or two, for whatever reason, then, you are stuck playing a totally mundane character until the timer goes back.  Or perhaps make it a thing that at least non magick extended subguilds could still be used, if you have the 1 point to use it, without the need of using a special app.

Shabago:
Thank you for the question, Zeia. We've had several discussions staff side regarding karma (and the perks that go with it), including about the time-frame. What the central argument tends to revolve around is both 'enough time' passage to avoid a saturation of certain character types. It's meant to encourage mundane play. However, we also recognize that some simply prefer to not play, when they are unable to app in their desired role, which is a concern and problem to tackle. In short - yes, there are plans and it is being looked into, with some potential to have it shortened.

Halaster:
maybe something to look at is allowing extended subguilds to be based on max karma, not current karma.  We'll take that up as a discussion topic among staff





Shabago:
@Patuk You were up next.

Patuk:
Some time ago, I learned that some thirty percent of PCs are mages. Among non-leaders, this percentage is even higher. Now that we have psionic subguild, the amount of non-mundanes is even higher yet. In the time between Luir's' occupation and the second PBRPT, it became increasingly clear how righteously screwed mundanes are against people using magick; Morin's' PCs had little to no recourse against Allanaki Gemmed having free reign in the north. What are staff's opinions on this dynamic? Are there any plans to add new features? And can mundane players hope to look at any changes to this?

Shabago:
Also a great question. Thank you. That's a valid concern for us, having mundanes hold appeal (especially given the initial answer above on karma). You and the rest of the player base may be pleased to know that there have, in fact, been discusses of late on the staff boards surrounding how to make mundanes more effective. While none of them are green-lit or fully hammered out thus far, certain portions have to do with better start skills, certain abilities, and so on. As for the very dynamic itself - no, it's not ideal and we recognise that. We'll be continuing to brainstorm out ways to bring all of it back into balance. - Halaster?

Halaster:
IMO, that's a difficult one.  There are some people who really enjoy playing mages.  This is, after all, a fantasy game where the backdrop is a world devastated by magick. For every person saying there's too many, we have someone playing them and having a good ol time.  So I'll be honest and say we don't have a good answer to that, yet.  But it is something we know people feel strongly about and are talking about it.

Patuk:
Thank you

Halaster:
One other thing..

It's not uncommon for people to be a little too 'accepting' of mages.  Everyone can help with this issue by remembering that mages are freaks, abominations, and probably would steal your baby.  So some of the 'cost' should be more social.

Patuk:
How are you going to change that?

Halaster:
Excellent question, to which.. we're still working on it, so I'll refer to my previous answer

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
That's at least partly on players to enforce.  You guys are the interaction points for most mages - be the change.  Treat them like the monsters they are.  Quit having positive relations with them, quit dealing with them openly.  Some of the changes may come from our end - we're thinking about it and working to address it.

Halaster:
We're not saying "it's all your fault".  Just there's multiple ways to approach it

Hestia:
It needs to be a cooperative venture, in other words.

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
^^

Tiernan:
Roleplaying is a partnership with staff and players.  The environment's designed one way but if players prefer to go upstream more than downstream, our options become limited.  Staff would prefer to tell stories than monitor and police consistent "upstream" deviations.

Reiloth:
It can be difficult when a Mage can effectively affect an entire 'area' of a game world, whereas a Mundane cannot, and they are difficult to either scare off or defeat.

Patuk:
Coordination is hard. This is a problem staff can solve more easily than any ordinary player

Shabago:
Please stick to turn base for players and staff to follow in queue. If you have follow up questions, we'll take them accordingly.





Shabago:
@val You had a question - please go ahead.

val:
Hello lovely staff  One time I had a staffer hit me up with a question about something over a Discord message.  I personally found it really nice to be able to have just a quick back and forth, but it also felt really weird to me to have informal contact when there's also a formal point a.k.a. the request tool, with me not knowing, like, the rules about it or whatever.  Is this actually allowed, or frowned on, or not-encouraged-but-okay?  Only when staff reach out first?  What's up with this.

Shabago:
We have a loose understanding on the team that anything that is considered too sensitive, requires research, any game changes, player affecting actions and so on should be directed to the request tool. Certain things have been permitted for discord interaction for the sake of expediency. Such as "I think you missed giving me a clan flag." - "I lost link and need to be purged out" or a staff member going "I see an error in an RPT posted time, it should be X" for example. Basic, simple answers/questions are or have been permitted. I believe, with you bringing that up, there should be a set guide on such for both player and staff facing. I'll add this to my to-do.

Tiernan:
I'm okay if it's staff-initiated only.   I don't really care for when players start DMing me out of nowhere.  The request tool should always be the primary route to initiate staff interaction.  Like in the business world, it helps surface all the things that ought to be surfaced.  Track issues, see trends, etc.   Also has more oversight than side-deals and DMs.

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
My personal preference is that I keep it open to my clan leaders or sponsored roles.  As Shabago said, if there's any sort of game solution that needs being done - I want that tracked on a request tool so others can reference it.  But if it's a question, or a quick "Hey this room doesn't work and you built it" then I prefer being notified rapidly and often will ask them to follow up with a request as well - again, so it's trackable.

I don't like being randomly pinged by players about any little thing, and many of you know that.  A lot of you have been super awesome about asking if you can DM me first, and that small point of "hey do you have a moment" really makes a world of difference.

Hestia:
I'm often open to receiving DMs, but I also have no problem asking the player to put their question in a request tool and ending the DM'ed conversation there. Most players are pretty awesome and accepting of that.

val:
@Shabago  As a follow up!  It might be nice to have your clan staff say when they come on, what their likes and expectations are.  Because people like me, I'm not going to ask, and then I might be disadvantaged (or feel disadvantaged, which is its whole own thing).  But it may be hard to implement an entire policy for.  Anyway, that's all I have, thanks.

Tiernan:
Definitely nice to be asked if you're free.  Having spent the majority of my career in a Tier-3 support role it's nice when folks take a minute to see if I'm not drowning first before pouring the bucket over my head.  Also a challenge to break out of that perception of "I only talk to TIernan when I'm having a terrible, horrible, no good, really bad day".

Shabago:
Thank you for the question Val, and I'll mark that down as well, for the 'to-dos'.





Shabago:
Next up, we have @Delirium Please go ahead.

Delirium:
Ok so I have 3 questions now, so to avoid being greedy I'm going to just ask my original one and then tag on the others (which are, admittedly, shorter) if approved.

I would like to figure out a means of removing or lessening the jarring OOC confusion over whether someone is merely offline, or if they are hiding, dead, or otherwise missing in IC fashion.

I have seen this abused in both directions: for example, someone kills a character, then tells people the character is alive but (enter excuse that makes it sound like they stored or are taking a break). On the other side of the coin, you have people that deliberately don't log in for x amount of time until other characters assume they're dead.  The non-abusive but still jarring version is when someone is absent from the game for a legitimate OOC reason, or their playtimes are just not meshing with yours for a while, but the players who interacted with them are left with no means of discerning if your absence is IC or OOC.

I'd like to find a solution to this that reduces or removes that OOC confusion but does not add to staff workload beyond implementing it.

tl;dr: can we introduce a way to discern if a character's absence is IC or OOC?

I have ideas, but I'm not a coder. I would first like to know if staff is even willing to look into this, as it has definitely been a recurring issue for many over the years.

Shabago:
I can appreciate that, especially for player-facing plots. It can be pretty frustrating. Ideally we would have players post to their associated clan boards on OOC absences or play-time changes. Baring this, as that is not always the case (or they don't have clan boards) - staff isn't against getting a request that is akin to "When was the last time so and so was seen/are they alive?/stored?" - < This particular approach should be given some time to cool IG. It's a delicate balance to not have some take meta knowledge in game and start spreading rumors of their death simply based on the answer. If it's lingered long enough that some assumptions begin to happen as is (RL week for example), then there isn't much harm in us making people aware to avoid some of the jarring issues you touch on.

As for a coded way - that hasn't been looked at or discussed for the sake of transparency.

Delirium:
My issue is when it shouldn't even need to be an assumption in the first place. What if you live with them, but don't share a clan, and you aren't the sort of player that communicates OOCly?

Also, if someone is hiding ICly, or hasn't been around but has been online and available over the way, etc, how do you handle that through requests? Having to ask staff every time and having that awkward pause of them having to investigate the situation.. there's no easy solution I can think of other than a means of offline waying (with checks against barrier) or re-introducing mudmail.

maybe this needs to be a GDB thread.

Also, I would argue, if someone was missing and/or dead.. you would KNOW. If you can't find them? Our characters don't cease existing when we're logged out.

being able to pretend someone is still alive when they're clearly missing is problematic.

Halaster:
GDB thread, yes.   Enough of that here.

Shabago:
There seems to be some questions to spiral out from it, yes. But, the answer given is the general method we employ. If someone is hiding IC, then they're hiding IC - staff may state 'they were seen X' if they passed NPCs who would care enough to remember them, but beyond that - we're not going to step on their attempt to remain undetected. That's something that would and should be dealt with IC/IG. But you're welcome to GDB for continuation on this.

Delirium:
I wouldn't want their attempt to hide be discouraged no. Okay. Moving on.

Shabago:
Please re-queue, Delirium. We have others waiting for fairness.

[mansa]

Shabago:
@Reiloth You had a question?

Reiloth:
yeeeeeah, i'm trimming it down and trying to be laconic, one sec.

How can Staff set Sponsored Roles up for success OOCly, playing roles like this more rewarding to the player, even if it isn't rewarding to the PC? There seems to be quite a bit of sponsored role turnover of late, and very long time commitments required for them to 'Get Lit' so to speak. I see Templars / GMH roles that are 1RL Year+ before they promote out, or get close to promoting out. Is that as intended, and that's the short version!
(Sorry, trimmed that down, hope it makes sense)

Shabago:
It does and thank you for the question. Each sponsor that goes into the game is directly given encouragement to have open and regular dialogue with us for any plans/goals they have for the game. Some of these goals and plans can take place in the near or short term for a sense of accomplishment - others, such as major promotions, can not. This is, yes, by design. The feeling we currently have is to make those big ticket punches be a real sense of accomplishment. Having a promotion given as a participation trophy for logging in for 3 months, before they accomplish any of their 'Big goals', is hardly a point of pride for the player and anti-thematic to the game at large. It should be hard and challenging. That aside, this factors into the over-all 'Grind' that was raised in Halaster's GDB thread. We've been discussing further action to be had here, both from a staff down or player up approach. Plots/storyies and potential for further advancement have been and continue to be discussed - and how that would look or be viable in the game as we have it. Other parts can be out of our control, such as PC underling involvement, death of plot pcs that are linked to their goals and so on. In these situations, we encourage said leadership to reach out and work with their storytellers to find a middle ground or path to carry their wants forward to find that rewarding outcome and or promotional step.

Reiloth:
Quick follow up: Has staff considered showing a promotion map?
(Meaning an example path, not 'do this to unlock the red robe prize') But it can be kind of confusing for sponsored leadership roles what to do exactly to get from point A to point B, or at least, for me.

Halaster:
There is certainly a previous gameplay decision (or series of them) affecting how high up people can advance, and we are having active staff discussions about that very topic.  And what, if anything, we want to change.

Usiku:
Southern Templar's actually have very thorough documentation in regards to that.

@Reiloth
(Meaning an example path, not 'do this to unlock the red robe prize') But it can be kind of confusing for sponsored leadership roles what to do exactly to get from point A to point B, or at least, for me.

Halaster:
That's probably specific to individual clans.  Maybe we need to lay that out more clearly in those individual clan docs.

Reiloth:
When skills/abilities are locked behind the promotions, that would be very helpful yes. Thank you for your time!

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
Please be aware that follow up questions are to be followed up in the queue channel.  This was posted in the queue channel as a rule.

Katima-Di 🚧:
There have been vast improvements in the system in the last few years, fortunately. I can vouch. It took no less than 3-4 IRL years to reach a point where you could obtain a position that you 'store into' when I was playing my first sponsored role, back when extended subguilds were still app-only. We've come a long way from that, and I know we'll continue fine-tuning it to find a happy place.





Shabago:
@ThingsWithWings is also wrong You had a question?

ThingsWithWings is also wrong:
I did, a bit long, apologies. Needed a bit of a preamble.

The recent change to psionics has seen a divided response from players. A lot undoubtedly appreciate the flexibility, functionality, and survivability of sub-guild split psionics, while some others still desire the kind of awe, wonder, and varied plot/RP potential a psionicist with access to the full psionics tree can offer. Myself, and others I know, are sad to see that particular flavour of narrative, fantastical strength leave the hands of the players again, while raw coded strength and PK-power still remains.

Generally, when large decisions like this are made, it's simply the case that everyone can't be pleased. Someone will always be unhappy, no matter how much work and passion was put in from staff. In this specific case, though, it seems as though both kinds of players could potentially be satisfied if full-guild and sub-guild psionicists were allowed to simply co-exist. I've been told repeatedly the problem was that full psi subguilds sucked, but I've also been told that guilds are one of the easiest things to adapt, and I still firmly believe that extended subguilds would suffice for a full psi, and players should be able to pick exceptionally difficult roles if they want to!

So, my question is: Why can sub-guild and full-guild psionicists not coexist? What harm is done by leaving both options available to players, even if some of those options are hard?

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
So there's a couple issues here that need addressing - while we understand that there may be some players who are against this change, these are also players that have not experienced the new subguilds and do not know what we've put in them.  This reaction is more of a "oh no I never got to play the pure stuff" than anything - and we do understand that.

One of the major issues with psionicists is that they had tremendous amounts of power when they were properly allowed to grow and flourish - that was something that we had to limit.  I'm sure most everyone here who is a veteran has experienced having some sort of plot point broken by a Certain Faction Who Will Remain Nameless But We All Whitenessed How Broken They Were in the past - because there were no secrets when they got all engines firing.  We needed to address that as well as the subguild issue - with the subguild being the almost exact opposite problem.  The old subguilds were a handicap to many a psionicist.

We found a healthy middle ground with the current psi subs.  They are more than adequate to do some really cool stuff, and they get a large variety of awesome mind schnazz to play with.  We want them thoroughly tested before we even think about approaching the main guild again - which to be honest we may not do.

Another thing to consider is that these guilds - the full elementalists, the full psions, the full sorcs - they were all built in a different time and era of the game.  They all had issues that needed addressing with all the tremendous amounts of code changes that have gone in in just the last 5 years if not decade.  They absolutely required some updating, and I think we addressed that in a very sound manner

As to why they can't co-exist, my reference above to we want them solidly tested, played, and worked out.  If there are problems with them, then we can address them more readily if people are actively working with them.  If we're like "Yeah we have these subguilds, or you can play the full monty" then a percentage of the players who apply will absolutely go the full monty.  We need to know if our work is solid before we move forward

And with that, next!





Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
@Babe loves the Sun King 🐷 you're up to bat

Babe loves the Sun King 🐷:
Howdy  if it's okay and on behalf of the other player, I'll be asking their questions for them and since the queue just closed I'll provide several but please only answer the ones that won't take too much time to respond to:

Would you consider adding a 'customer service' sort of staffer (or three), who is the face for request responses? One that focuses on calm, patient wording, tone, and demeanor in a reply can make all the difference between a player continuing to play or not. It may help request bloat and resolution time to have a staffer with that focus while preventing burnout for those who animate and code.

What policies are in place to prevent burn out for staffers if any?

Are there requirements staff have to fulfill at a minimum every week? (edited)

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
No you'll get this one.
The Queue Is Closed.

Halaster:
It would be "nice" to have a customer service sort of staffer.  And I suppose if anyone ever came on board and volunteered to do that most of us would love to have them do that.  But there aren't really a lot of people who are going to want to do that for very long.  It's like being a moderator - it consumes your soul.  And honestly, a lot of times answers to the questions require the staff in charge of that area/clan anyway.  Someone who just answers them all up front may not know that, or may have to divert the request to the appropriate staffer anyway.  And then it's starting to sound like a helpdesk ticketing queue to me and that's like work and... ugh.  Plus, if we lost that person we'd have to try to refill it.  It's not a bad idea, but in a volunteer niche game like that it would be difficult to pull off.  That said, I'll add it to our discussions from the feedback thread, it can't bad to talk about. (edited)

Babe loves the Sun King 🐷:
Thank you!

[mansa]

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
@Lady of Long Dogs you're up!

Lady of Long Dogs:
Hello team, would there be a possibility to use the current (and future) karma system to offer a standard set of skills that are already evolved to at least jman AFTER the death of a long lived PC, to help with the grind issue? I hate grinding, on top of the fact that I have little time, being a responsible adult/mom. So with a new PC I always end up trying to find fails, look at the time, see if an hour has passed and fail again. And I've noticed that's keeping me more occupied than it should. Additionally, its so hard for new PCs to find a way to survive. I understand its set up that way many years ago, so people would join a clan. But at times that too is hard when Leaders aren't available, or play at different time zones. Or have no assistant that can hire in their stead. So in example I'd love to see the foraging skill go up at least to jman, or a fighting skill, so that one can at least kill a beast to skin or to eat. And sometimes a player just wants to stay unclanned.

Halaster:
The topic of "The Grind" was the number one issue in the feedback thread, by a pretty large margin.  I have to admit, my reaction is to say "It's fine like it is" because in my opinion it's actually easier than it ever was, because the new guilds start off higher than they used to.  But that said, we would be foolish to not listen to the number one complaint of our playerbase.  There's a ton of ways to tackle this, from offline skill gains (which I was surprised to see such a negative reaction to by the playerbase), to ways to spend karma for skill bumps, and so on.  We don't have a solid answer yet on what to do or if we will do something.  But it's definitely something we are discussing now because of the feedback.

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
So curiously enough this is actually a factor of the Old Old Old Game... where if I recall ( @Halaster  please correct me if I'm wrong here) I believe there was a function that allowed one or two skills to have minor bumps as you travelled from PC to PC.  That was cut out back in the pre-2000 era and hasn't been re-implemented.

The grind issue is something that we are currently looking at - as in it is currently in active discussion and has many eyes on it.  How it is going to go, I can not say due to the fact that it is a very, very complex issue.  Some players have no problem dumping 10 hours a day into the grind and they actually enjoy that grind.  Others, like yourself (and to a limited amount, me as well) are not so much in to the grind and would prefer to just have more time to roleplay on the roleplaying game.

Lady of Long Dogs:
it just makes it so much more appealing to actually store a fully branched PC which isn't fun anymore





Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
I believe that brings us to @Zot   I'm hustling us along so we can make sure to hit everyone

Zot:
What is staff opinion (or your opinion) on a more formal recruitment project, ideally to involve more people in bringing new victims in, retaining more, and doing so in a high quality, numbers-controlled way?

Halaster:
are you talking about new players recruitment?

Zot:
yes

Halaster:
We're all for it!  It's really just a matter of deciding to do so and finding a victim staffer willing to do it.  Most of us tend to be focused on either coding and building, or running plots, or whatever.

Aromit is a fish:
We all know ts a limited market for players, I don't think I ever get more involved in the goings on of a pc than when it is a new player. Every new account that sticks around to enjoy our community I cherish. Our biggest tool for recruiting is our community. We all have the same voice for promoting this game and I encourage everyone to use it. Tell your friends, mention us on roleplaying forums, reddit or wherever you can. Post a flyer at your local gaming store.

Usiku:
We welcome suggestions and ideas. We also have a publicity sub-forum on the GDB that can be joined.

Also vote! It does have an impact when we are higher on TMS.

Aromit is a fish:
^

Shabago:
Brief mention that there are two active goals for staff at present - one for new players, and one for veteran outreach. One involves more exposure and another involves making our past-playing vets be aware of various game changes/updates that may have lead to their departing.





Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
@val  your second question, please?

val:
Can you tell us a little about a project you're working on that excites you?  Or that you think will excite us and keep us engaged and wanting to come back for more?  (no spoilers obvs)

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
There are a couple that are pretty cool!

One is the project for Critical Failures and Successes on spellchecks - this takes a ton of work, and @Halaster has been really going gangbusters on it.  Expect more changes to come down the pipeline as we go.

There's also a project that I've been filtering through ideas on for the last couple years, and that's finding a solid way to increase the amount of microfauna in the game without making this AllTheTinyCreaturesGeddon... tiny little pet critters, and tiny little other things.

Halaster:
Hah.  I have a project I'm working on that probably wouldn't excite all that many people, but I like it so I do it.  But the SimRaider thing I've done recently and plan to iterate on soon seems to be pretty popular.  It's kinda clunky and basic at the moment, but I've gotten some good data and feedback on it to expand further.  A little down the line, I've got something else that will sort of spinoff from SimRaider for even more funtimes in the desert.

Shabago:
I'm currently brainstorming your next PB-RPT. And, we have an active discussion going on about a large, world wide impacting plot to get rolling.

Aromit is a fish:
Shabago had also made a thread that includes some of the current project/shenanigans: https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,56309.0.html
A small peek behind the curtain.

Usiku: I just had my first teeny, tiny project given the nod. So I'm pretty stoked about that, but I don't think anyone else will be.

Tiernan:
I've had SSL  TLS, (thanks you know who you are), support on my ToDo list for quite a while.  I'm not entirely sure just how much player support there is for it so I feel like its value proposition isn't strong enough.  Then I push it back into the parking lot and revisit it later.

Drinn:
I made a monster.

Aromit is a fish:
Wildlife upgrades, excitement, randomization within the biomes to make things less predictable for all of us.





Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
@mansa you're up!   We're getting close to 3 PM and still have a decent amount of questions left, so I'm going to try to hustle us a bit.

mansa:
What does the staff want to accomplish with the story of Zalanthas and the game of ArmageddonMUD ?

Shalooonsh is on TeamEverShine:
Very simple answer:
We want people to have fun in our shared virtual world.

Usiku:
Fun and creativity. Continued shared stories.