I can see some instances for free food...like the gruel for the Byn or the Militia. That could be something important and unique to them, since their RP specifically revolves around a militaristic, mess-hall like atmosphere. But the Byn for example, doesn't get free water.
But how different would the game be if say, noble houses, merchant houses and the such, didn't get free unlimited food? In every clan I've been in, there has always been bins upon bins stuffed with food, but everyone just gets the free steak from the cook.
I can understand free water. But food is so incredibly plentiful in the game, that I do not see the point, beyond giving people less things to do.
What's the worse that could happen? An aide or a junior merchant might have to walk down to the local grocer with 500 sids each RL week, to buy a bunch've food? Hunters might be a bit more useful? It'd be amazing if someone actually did buy food from a grocer in this game on a regular basis. I have a hard time imagining any of the current clans not being able to keep themselves stocked on food. Because again, most have tens of thousands of sids, and a grocer is right around the corner. You want a challenge, try keeping a whole unit of Byn watered up on a Trooper's means and salaries. But that somehow is made to work.
I've always had the most fun in clan roles or situations where we had to deal with our own provisions. Does anyone else feel the same way?
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 08:53:12 PM
I can see some instances for free food...like the gruel for the Byn or the Militia.
But how different would the game be if say, noble houses, merchant houses and the such, didn't get unlimited food? In every clan I've been in, there has always been bins upon bins stuffed with food, but everyone just gets the free steak from the cook.
I can understand free water. But food is so incredibly plentiful in the game, that I do not.
What's the worse that could happen? An aide or a junior merchant might have to walk down to the local grocer with 500 sids each RL week, to buy a bunch've food? Hunters might be a bit more useful?
I've always had the most fun in clan roles or situations, where we had to deal with our own provisions. Does anyone else feel the same way?
In House X (up north, RIP), whether oversight or on purpose, the cook was only accessible to the nobility, behind a locked door. The rest of us had to rely on the charity. It worked pretty well.
Quote from: nauta on May 17, 2015, 08:57:04 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 08:53:12 PM
I can see some instances for free food...like the gruel for the Byn or the Militia.
But how different would the game be if say, noble houses, merchant houses and the such, didn't get unlimited food? In every clan I've been in, there has always been bins upon bins stuffed with food, but everyone just gets the free steak from the cook.
I can understand free water. But food is so incredibly plentiful in the game, that I do not.
What's the worse that could happen? An aide or a junior merchant might have to walk down to the local grocer with 500 sids each RL week, to buy a bunch've food? Hunters might be a bit more useful?
I've always had the most fun in clan roles or situations, where we had to deal with our own provisions. Does anyone else feel the same way?
In House X (up north, RIP), whether oversight or on purpose, the cook was only accessible to the nobility, behind a locked door. The rest of us had to rely on the charity. It worked pretty well.
Yes. I've also been in clans that had units posted in parts of the Known that didn't have an automated cook. It was always a much more awesome experience to sustain ourselves. There's nothing to make a ranger feel uniquely useless, than knowing any meat he brings in, is basically worthless beyond selling for sids to some random NPC (a rarely fulfilling experience compared to keeping your buddies fed).
It doesn't help that lots of gear can also get loaded by merchants, without even needing to hunt down the requisite parts. Most storehouses of clans end up overflowing with unused hides and mats. I'd like a quota, where if so-and-so wasn't acquired every month, there might be shortages or restrictions, and then it gets junked into the void as submerging into the virtual economy. Hell, imms should randomly get rid of stuff, as being taken by VNPCs anyways, every few RL months.
Clans would just recruit merchants on questionable IC justifications to spamcraft and buy food.
Or clan staff would simply increase noble stipends to account for food and water costs.
Wouldn't really change anything in any significantly good way.
Quote from: Synthesis on May 17, 2015, 09:07:59 PM
Clans would just recruit merchants on questionable IC justifications to spamcraft and buy food.
Or clan staff would simply increase noble stipends to account for food and water costs.
Wouldn't really change anything in any significantly good way.
Maybe. Personally, I find this answer unconvincing. I've noticed that there is:
1) Already enough loose change (tens upon tens of thousands of unneeded sids) in any clan worthy enough to be currently graced with an automatic cook, that stipends would not need to be increased. It's not a significant expense to begin with. It'd take some clans a RL year just to eat through the food they have stockpiled already.
2) There is enough dead time, with nothing particular to do, such that clans would not need to hire anyone else to take care of these needs. Not with the current state of clans.
I also don't see the difference between spamcooking, and spam eating. If anything, spam cooking is most defensible, as you could have multiple steaks cooking at once, but couldn't be making multiple arrows at the same time.
I know there's a potentially valid point out there somewhere, but I don't find these particularly compelling.
What's far more valuable than sids, in any clan, is giving people something legitimate to do. Giving a minor aide responsibility for keeping the larders stocked is 'something legitimate to do'.
I do not think the perceived benefits outweigh the detriment to offpeak players, or players who would like to spend their playtime doing things more interesting than scrounging for food.
Also, it's already a chore to entice people to join your clan. Removing one of the things that makes clanned play appealing just makes that harder.
Also, I've personally seen how quickly a handful of PCs will go through stockpiled food if there's no automated cook. It's much faster than you think.
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 17, 2015, 09:15:00 PM
I do not think the perceived benefits outweigh the detriment to offpeak players, or players who would like to spend their playtime doing things more interesting than scrounging for food.
Also, it's already a chore to entice people to join your clan. Removing one of the things that makes clanned play appealing just makes that harder.
Also, I've personally seen how quickly a handful of PCs will go through stockpiled food if there's no automated cook. It's much faster than you think.
Well. I've played numerous clans and indies, that didn't have access to free food. So I've got a good pretty good idea how fast it goes!
Anyways. Clans still would still give free water. That's a significant advantage.
I also don't see how it would affect offpeak players. There's going to be a food bin or a larder, which presumably is being kept stocked by those with the responsibility to do so. Whether they're playing at 3 AM or 3 PM shouldn't matter.
And again, the Byn seems to make do without free water, which is far more valuable (and more expensive) than free food. They have offpeak players to, and somehow its worked out the last fifteen years.
You sorely underestimate the value of having even the slightest in game reason to give someone something to occupy themselves with. This game does not suffer from having not enough people to do everything that needs doing. It suffers from not having enough that needs doing by most people, with a rare few being incredibly busy.
EDIT: This is entirely off-topic, but if 'free food' is a significant factor in a clan's recruiting ability, then something is
dramatically wrong with that clan's appeal.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:18:30 PM
And again, the Byn seems to make do without free water, which is far more valuable (and more expensive) than free food. They have offpeak players to, and somehow its worked out the last fifteen years.
Ummm.
Quote from: whitt on May 17, 2015, 09:22:01 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:18:30 PM
And again, the Byn seems to make do without free water, which is far more valuable (and more expensive) than free food. They have offpeak players to, and somehow its worked out the last fifteen years.
Ummm.
What diid the Byn start getting free water too, in the last couple years? (By the way, just posting 'Ummm' without any other context, is surprisingly annoying!)
Since 2010, at least. That's five years.
Quote from: MeTekillot on May 17, 2015, 09:26:52 PM
Since 2010, at least. That's five years.
That's about how long it's been since I was in the Byn. Okay. Then I revise my statement to where no free water worked fine for the Byn for ten years, before they pussied out. How disappointing. I had a Trooper in the Byn that managed to occupy himself with a lot of downtime RP, just by making sure the water situation was well taken care of. It was a legitimate duty that needed handling, as opposed to the Sisyphean makework that seems to predominate lately.
I suppose that's one way of looking at it. The other was that time I started taking dehydration damage as a Byn Runner. That wasn't very much fun for me. Think I had to wish up for staff help with water so I didn't dehydrate to death?
I mean, if your character is in a clan where their position justifies gathering food and/or water for the clan... that's something you can do regardless of the existence of an automated cook.
If you're so bored and lacking for something, anything to do, that you need cook NPCs removed to justify your food hunting, there are some other serious issues at hand, be it the your clan leadership, or your willingness to get involved in things your clan leadership is doing, among other things.
Quote from: MeTekillot on May 17, 2015, 09:31:49 PM
I suppose that's one way of looking at it. The other was that time I started taking dehydration damage as a Byn Runner. That wasn't very much fun for me. Think I had to wish up for staff help with water so I didn't dehydrate to death?
I've been a Runner a dozen times, at least, and I never managed to get anywhere near dehydration, nor saw anyone else. There was no one else you could have turned to for assistance outside a staff intervention or an unlimited fountain?
But dude. There's only so much that characters have to do to maintain themselves. Food and water is basically it. They're plentiful and easy to come by, if you're willing to actually spend sids on it.
I remember when only nobles got free water and that was a BIG deal. What you gain by having a fraction more convenience, or saving an especially dull-witted Runner, you lose out in the thematic weight of the world and meeting your survival needs. Take food and water out of the equation, by making them free and unlimited to every raw recruit in a clan, turns the game into just a MUSH or a hack'n'slash, and removes that gritty, survival element.
There aren't a lot of duties that any character can be expected to reasonably contribute towards, or feel a sense of shared responsibility for. I'd rather be scraping for food and water, than sitting around bored with nothing to do.
The Byn now has water. Because it was lame when they didn't and enough people bitched until the staff put it in. I think a couple of characters have even died of thirst in the compound before.
AoD recruits don't have a food or water source right now. It's annoying for both the people who run out of food, and the soldiers who have to remember refilling cisterns and restocking shelves. It's not like it's super hard or anything, it just always comes down to a "I could be doing a lot better things than spamming 'ask cook sausage' forty times."
I imagine it would only be even more annoying if you had to depend on ranking members to go out and kill and skin 10 scrabs just to stock enough food for the next couple of days.
Edit: Also, for people who can go out and get food like GMH hunters? It's super easy. Easy enough that it doesn't really add anything by making certain people HAVE to do it that way. That's why some clans have bins stocked to the brim with food. The only people this would really effect it would probably effect greatly.
I can't imagine why anyone would join a clan other than for the plots, if these were taken out. Is it not enough that you don't get any actual pay at scrub rank, but you now want to take food and water guaranteed away as well?
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 17, 2015, 09:36:10 PM
I mean, if your character is in a clan where their position justifies gathering food and/or water for the clan... that's something you can do regardless of the existence of an automated cook.
If you're so bored and lacking for something, anything to do, that you need cook NPCs removed to justify your food hunting, there are some other serious issues at hand, be it the your clan leadership, or your willingness to get involved in things your clan leadership is doing, among other things.
I don't mean to single you out, but this response embodies almost everything I find insufferable about a certain subset of the Armageddon player culture. Instead of actually contributing anything of worth, pretend that you are, by harvesting meat no one will ever use or require. I guess there are some people out there that might get a kick out of that - but I find that both sad and boring. I don't even consider it good RP. It's just delusional.
The rest is just more '
be the change' nonsense.
In the end, I've yet to see a single compelling reason (I don't think a dehydrating Runner counts. If anything, that's a perk) why players shouldn't be able to take responsibility of their own food and water situation (the latter, I can see remaining a 'privilege'). It gives them more stuff to do.
I know people have an instinct on this board to defend anything because that's the way it is. But I've seen the game with, and I've seen the game without free food/water, and without is a much more richer and interesting experience.
Instead of some mealy 'be the change' platitude, I'd like to hear how completely removing the hunting/supply equation out of a 'survival based' RPI for most clans, enhances the game world or playing experience for most characters. I think it amounts to either laziness, or just defending something for the sake of it being the way it currently is.
You do have the option to play in the clans that don't provide free food or water, as well as take the indie route where your concerns are also addressed.
When you take away food and water from clans that have it, as they currently exist, a whole host of problems arise.
When I played a Salarri family member, at the peak of clan activity for that character, I had 22 PCs on my monthly roster. Due to a variety of IC circumstances, there was no sergeant for the hunters and very few ranking PCs capable of leading others outside of the gates. Of these 22 PCs, they were spread over a wide variety of time zones and thus not all available to hunt together at the same time. Now lets assume these 22 PCs don't have access to food or water.
They will absolutely devour any amount of stored food. Consider at least half of them to be hunters. If they're going out and hunting, they're burning through thirst and hunger points much quicker, so they're consuming more food. Now consider the offpeakers who can't go hunt a scrab alone (assuming I'm willing to let the fresh recruit leave the gates alone in the first place) if it turns out they have no water. What if you're the newbie who plays at 4am and the cistern is empty and you're broke because recruits get paid nothing and you're dehydrated and don't know where to find water even though realistically, your clan has plenty of it? Consider the PCs in charge of all of this? When they log in, do you think they want to log in and work on a plot to find buried treasure, or spend 2 hours making sure the larder is stocked?
I can tell you what I'd rather do.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:45:42 PM
In the end, I've yet to see a single compelling reason (I don't think a dehydrating Runner counts. If anything, that's a perk) why players shouldn't be able to take responsibility of their own food and water situation (the latter, I can see remaining a 'privilege'). It gives them more stuff to do.
What if they're incapable of doing it though? If someone is playing off-peak, there is no food or water, and nobody who can get it for them. What do they do? Log off.
I agree, but only for clans who normally have pc hunters. So mostly the GMH's?
If there are no pc hunters in one of these clans (which seems rare) it would give the leaders incentive to bring on new hunters, or hire experienced ones to feed their crafters, etc.
Could give clans more to do as a group, while experiencing that basic survival instinct that sometimes seems lacking in said clans. And if food and water begins to run out, then you have conflict while fighting over resources.
And if it's still too easy to live off food/water if implemented, we can talk about rot code...
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 17, 2015, 09:47:39 PM
You do have the option to play in the clans that don't provide free food or water, as well as take the indie route where your concerns are also addressed.
When you take away food and water from clans that have it, as they currently exist, a whole host of problems arise.
When I played a Salarri family member, at the peak of clan activity for that character, I had 22 PCs on my monthly roster. Due to a variety of IC circumstances, there was no sergeant for the hunters and very few ranking PCs capable of leading others outside of the gates. Of these 22 PCs, they were spread over a wide variety of time zones and thus not all available to hunt together at the same time. Now lets assume these 22 PCs don't have access to food or water.
They will absolutely devour any amount of stored food. Consider at least half of them to be hunters. If they're going out and hunting, they're burning through thirst and hunger points much quicker, so they're consuming more food. Now consider the offpeakers who can't go hunt a scrab alone (assuming I'm willing to let the fresh recruit leave the gates alone in the first place) if it turns out they have no water. What if you're the newbie who plays at 4am and the cistern is empty and you're broke because recruits get paid nothing and you're dehydrated and don't know where to find water even though realistically, your clan has plenty of it? Consider the PCs in charge of all of this? When they log in, do you think they want to log in and work on a plot to find buried treasure, or spend 2 hours making sure the larder is stocked?
I can tell you what I'd rather do.
You only had problems, because out of the tens of thousands of obsidian you had available, you were apparently unwilling to spend a tiny fraction of it on the grocers.
If a clan is run so badly, that newbies are finding empty cisterns and larders on a regular basis, then that clan is probably overpopulated to begin with. That suddenly seems like a great way for the clans to keep themselves to a reasonable size, without the imms needing to arbitrarily close them now and then! It might also make the clans more choosy about how they let in. Being more choosy will make others want to join them more.
In the end, having it automated, just takes away more chances to meaningfully make a difference (however small), and leaves you with more of the pretendy crap. There are precious few opportunities for most players to make a real difference in Arm. Keeping a larder stocked or water barrel full is the most accessible.
Yeah, I guess if you're an agent or a sergeant and dealing with real important issues all the time, this matters less. But most people have precious few chances to feel like they're legitimately contributing to their clan. Automating what their supposed purpose is (Hunting), just makes them good for nothing but lounging around the Gaj, mudsexxing and comparing their latest Salarri purchase.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 17, 2015, 09:49:17 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:45:42 PM
In the end, I've yet to see a single compelling reason (I don't think a dehydrating Runner counts. If anything, that's a perk) why players shouldn't be able to take responsibility of their own food and water situation (the latter, I can see remaining a 'privilege'). It gives them more stuff to do.
What if they're incapable of doing it though? If someone is playing off-peak, there is no food or water, and nobody who can get it for them. What do they do? Log off.
Like I said before. I already assume that water will stay the way it is. It's too enshrined. Even though I long for the days when free water was for nobles only. So let's step away from that straw man. Food is MUCH easier than water to get.
I find it incredibly laughable, that any of the current clans that are open for business, would ever be in the situation of a starving newbie. (
And since when has Arm EVER cared about starving newbies?) All it takes is 500 sids and a trip to the grocer by one of the aides, or even a semi-active couple of hunters, to keep a reasonably sized clan stocked. It wouldn't surprise me if people were going hungry in Havok's clan, even with 50000+ sids sitting around in various pockets and accounts (a conservative estimate, all together), cause they're saving it up for their next Salarri order.
If that's not working, then it's probably so overpopulated and poorly run, that the game will be done a favor if the stress causes some to leave and seek employment elsewhere, or else to cut away the dead chaff.
Maybe that's why some are so wedded to the idea of free food. It allows them to perpetuate poorly run clans by covering up the weaknesses that having a couple legitimately active and dedicated players would prevent. I'd rather things took a more Darwinian turn. There's so few open clans now, that I can't imagine it getting into this point anyhow. I'm not surprised Tuluki noble clans would have collapsed without it.
Let's break it down by clan.
T'zai Byn - Mercenaries. Not hunters. This is stressed in the T'zai Byn documentation, unless it's been changed since I last saw it. You don't join the Byn to for the hunter experience. You join the byn to be a professional fighter and mercenary during your tenure with the company. So assume they don't get automated food. Someone has to go buy food every couple days (or daily) and make sure there is a surplus so everyone is stocked when you go on a contract. I don't know if the Byn have their own stable in Allanak yet, but if they don't, I can guarantee you that requiring the Byn to buy their own food means they can only ever accept extremely lucrative contracts or they will operate at a financial loss. This is a reality of the way the clan functions. It's not fun trying to make sure your troopers get more than 10 sid each for the contract because stable fees ate up a quarter of the pay. Do the perceived benefits of requiring someone to go buy this food every few days make up for the negatives?
Militia - Theoretically backed with the resources of the city state. Professional soldiers and guards. Not hunters. You don't generally join the militia for the hunting experience. You join the militia to be a professional soldier or guard. This means someone has to go buy food every few days. Is this fun for that person? What does it add and do these perceived additions make up for the downsides?
Noble Houses - Theoretically rich as fuck. Supposedly one of the best jobs a commoner can hope for but oh yeah uh sorry we don't have a horde of slaves doing our bidding. Go buy your own sausage!
Merchant Houses - This is the closest any clan will come to having proper justification for PCs needing to hunt their own food, but guess what? The wealthiest noble house doesn't come close to the poorest Greater Merchant House, in terms of buying power. The PCs leading these clans suffer an incredibly high turnover rate due to the varied stresses of the role (which the warehouse change will hopefully address). Off-peak players commonly join these clans as a low-commitment way to get involved with clan RP as well as sustain their character so they don't have to spend all their offpeak playtime looking for food or water. Do the benefits of making these players hunt for their own food significantly outweight the downsides?
First time I saw the cook npc's, they were pretty damn sweet and novel and cool because then I didn't have to buy food anymore with my pc who couldn't leave the gates.
All sorts of information to glean out of that single statement.
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 17, 2015, 10:02:03 PM
Let's break it down by clan.
T'zai Byn
Militia
Noble Houses
Merchant Houses
T'zai Byn - I've already said the T'zai Byn should keep their gruel. It's key to their thematic mess hall/barracks/paramilitary experience. It helps poor little newbies. I think the free water since 2010 is a massive joke, but so be it. That's a good way to ensure that new players treat water as a given, instead of the precious resource it used to be. I remember when people could actually pay for stuff with water (when trading with other PCs). Such an offer would be laughed at, now.
Militia - See above.
Noble Houses - Nobles always need to have something for their people to do. It shocks me you don't realize this. Nobles should have no trouble giving an aide some sids every RL week or so, to go buy a ton of food and stock the larder with it. There's only a few noble houses open now. There's going to be some noble around, and it gives them something to have their F-me aide do. Conversely, it gives them a good reason to offer some exorbitant salary to hire a good hunter or two away from the merchant clans. This would make noble houses a natural destination. A player's career could easily span the Byn, to a merchant house, to a noble house. Nobles would be more picky, and the added pickiness would actually increase the desirability of the roles. Currently, noble houses often struggle to differentiate themselves from other organizations.
Merchant Houses - I don't know what Armageddon game you have been playing, but I've played in the merchant houses a significant amount. I've had a leadership position in them. They're as stable population wise as any other clan. Probably more so, outside some certain delves. Even a partially active clan goes through so many beasts in the natural course of just doing a patrol every now and then, that skinning them becomes a huge pain in the ass and a hassle.
Because even if you lug the meat home, all the meat bins are stuffed to full, so we'd often end up leaving it, junking it or vendoring it. And hey! What's wrong with letting hunters be hunters, and not having to pretend they're contributing? (And I can't help but wonder if you're overly influenced by experience with the Tuluki clans and their wretched clinging to existence). There used to be roughly two versions of each clan, (a northern and a southern branch). Now there's effectively one. I can't ever imagine Salarr, Kurac or Kadius running out of food. If you've ever played a hunter/officer in one of these clans, then you know what I mean. Not without gross mismanagement and overpopulation.
I'd rather have the PC population of a clan capped by our actual in game supply capacity, than being arbitrarily shut for no reason, because it was stuffed full of freeloaders.
QuoteI don't mean to single you out, but this response embodies almost everything I find insufferable about a certain subset of the Armageddon player culture. Instead of actually contributing anything of worth, pretend that you are, by harvesting meat no one will ever use or require. I guess there are some people out there that might get a kick out of that - but I find that both sad and boring. I don't even consider it good RP. It's just delusional.
And yet you did single him out. It's not 'insufferable' to try and resist being forced into activities that may or may not be his cup of tea. You're of a mind that you want the struggle for survival to come first and foremost, so you want everyone to be IC'ly concerned about keeping the IC meals coming. Which is fine.
He doesn't want every job he joins to start assigning him with a schedule of food hunting, which will more than likely turn into hunting deaths (yes, prior to cook npc's, you died often just to random things while hunting for food), just because you are of the mind that the supply of food by clans is detracting from the RP you want. Which is fine.
It's two perspectives, basically about emphasis on which parts of the game are enjoyable to people. And you don't have to consider it good RP, but you do have to consider that the delusion isn't his, it's yours, since you decided to use the word, and it's less insulting than you intended since delusion requires true belief, which you also seem to have. Or, we could settle on the happy medium and realize neither of them are delusional, just different.
I have not been swayed by any of Clearsighted's arguments. Perhaps I blindly follow the automated food camp. I'd like staff to give us different ways to change the world with what we have now, instead of taking away what we have now and saying we're changing the world by keeping our clanmates fed by bashing in the brains of the nearest scrab.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:56:53 PM
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 17, 2015, 09:49:17 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:45:42 PM
In the end, I've yet to see a single compelling reason (I don't think a dehydrating Runner counts. If anything, that's a perk) why players shouldn't be able to take responsibility of their own food and water situation (the latter, I can see remaining a 'privilege'). It gives them more stuff to do.
What if they're incapable of doing it though? If someone is playing off-peak, there is no food or water, and nobody who can get it for them. What do they do? Log off.
Like I said before. I already assume that water will stay the way it is. It's too enshrined. Even though I long for the days when free water was for nobles only. So let's step away from that straw man. Food is MUCH easier than water to get.
I find it incredibly laughable, that any of the current clans that are open for business, would ever be in the situation of a starving newbie. (And since when has Arm EVER cared about starving newbies?) All it takes is 500 sids and a trip to the grocer by one of the aides, or even a semi-active couple of hunters, to keep a reasonably sized clan stocked. It wouldn't surprise me if people were going hungry in Havok's clan, even with 50000+ sids sitting around in various pockets and accounts (a conservative estimate, all together), cause they're saving it up for their next Salarri order.
If that's not working, then it's probably so overpopulated and poorly run, that the game will be done a favor if the stress causes some to leave and seek employment elsewhere, or else to cut away the dead chaff.
Maybe that's why some are so wedded to the idea of free food. It allows them to perpetuate poorly run clans by covering up the weaknesses that having a couple legitimately active and dedicated players would prevent. I'd rather things took a more Darwinian turn. There's so few open clans now, that I can't imagine it getting into this point anyhow. I'm not surprised Tuluki noble clans would have collapsed without it.
Heh, I feel like you're not in a mood to discuss things, but instead just argue blindly against anyone who disagrees with you. In the quote you used of me I said "food and water." not just water. Calling the whole point within a straw-man and waving it off without addressing it. And then you waved away my question about players with nobody around entirely by saying you think it's laughable that a newbie would ever be starving. But that's the thing. I never said they'd be starving. I just said they'd probably log out if they were hungry and nobody was on to get them food. You say that would never happen, but I've seen a few instances where no food was around in the AoD and nobody was around to get it at the time(even though there's more than enough people to be stockpiling it for ages if need be). This forces people to log off and only stick around when other people have re-stocked it. How is that adding anything to the game?
If people have a hard time stocking the AoD with food and water, when all they have to do is go to a free food/water vendor across the town. Why don't you think it will be possible for other clans to have the same problem, when they have a much harder job of going out into the dangerous wilds and hunting down animals just for 2 pieces of meat.
Quote from: Rhyden on May 17, 2015, 09:52:01 PM
I agree, but only for clans who normally have pc hunters. So mostly the GMH's?
If there are no pc hunters in one of these clans (which seems rare) it would give the leaders incentive to bring on new hunters, or hire experienced ones to feed their crafters, etc.
Could give clans more to do as a group, while experiencing that basic survival instinct that sometimes seems lacking in said clans. And if food and water begins to run out, then you have conflict while fighting over resources.
And if it's still too easy to live off food/water if implemented, we can talk about rot code...
Alright. So now you have a bunch of hunters, hunting to feed people. What has changed? They were already hunting for skins/hides/shells, most hunters I've known want to be hunting as much as possible to grind up their skills. They were already stockpiling the meat. If anything all you're changing is the frequency with which hunters -have- to hunt for the benefit of others in the clan instead of for themselves. What exactly is that adding to the game? Better yet, how much of a disincentive is that adding to clans, which many people already believe to be less attractive than being an Indy.
Quote from: Armaddict on May 17, 2015, 10:18:31 PM
QuoteI don't mean to single you out, but this response embodies almost everything I find insufferable about a certain subset of the Armageddon player culture. Instead of actually contributing anything of worth, pretend that you are, by harvesting meat no one will ever use or require. I guess there are some people out there that might get a kick out of that - but I find that both sad and boring. I don't even consider it good RP. It's just delusional.
And yet you did single him out. It's not 'insufferable' to try and resist being forced into activities that may or may not be his cup of tea. You're of a mind that you want the struggle for survival to come first and foremost, so you want everyone to be IC'ly concerned about keeping the IC meals coming. Which is fine.
He doesn't want every job he joins to start assigning him with a schedule of food hunting, which will more than likely turn into hunting deaths (yes, prior to cook npc's, you died often just to random things while hunting for food), just because you are of the mind that the supply of food by clans is detracting from the RP you want. Which is fine.
It's two perspectives, basically about emphasis on which parts of the game are enjoyable to people. And you don't have to consider it good RP, but you do have to consider that the delusion isn't his, it's yours, since you decided to use the word, and it's less insulting than you intended since delusion requires true belief, which you also seem to have. Or, we could settle on the happy medium and realize neither of them are delusional, just different.
I don't see your point, Arm. If he doesn't want to be assigned to food hunting, then he should probably not join clans as a hunter. There would be other clans, such as the militia or byn, or joining a GMH as something besides a hunter, that would see him excused from such a responsibility.
If anything, it's a red herring.
But I won't settle on us being equally delusional. There is a profound difference to having an actual job in the game world that people actually benefit from and seek out. Getting meat is the most basic way that theoretically, an outdoors character can make themselves useful or needed by someone else. But it's also been completely 'roboticized', which has an effect on Hunter RP, what robotics has on the American factory worker.
There are precious few 'blue collar' occupations in Armageddon that there is any real use for, outside dying on HRPTs now and then or being a sparring buddy. When you completely automate food and supplies (such as for getting fancy stuff loaded into the game) you just make everyone else superfluous.
That leaves you in a situation where agents, nobles, officers and such...THEY don't have to pretend they are contributing or making a difference. But evidently, the lesser ranks do have to pretend that what they do matters. Anything that the clan hunter might have to offer to the agent, noble or lieutenant, is effectively automated with or without them. But not the other way around.
That's what I took an issue with.
And again. It's not the worse thing in the world if clans were to have a natural cap based on their ability to sustain, instead of taking everyone until closed.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 17, 2015, 10:24:34 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:56:53 PM
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 17, 2015, 09:49:17 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 09:45:42 PM
In the end, I've yet to see a single compelling reason (I don't think a dehydrating Runner counts. If anything, that's a perk) why players shouldn't be able to take responsibility of their own food and water situation (the latter, I can see remaining a 'privilege'). It gives them more stuff to do.
What if they're incapable of doing it though? If someone is playing off-peak, there is no food or water, and nobody who can get it for them. What do they do? Log off.
Like I said before. I already assume that water will stay the way it is. It's too enshrined. Even though I long for the days when free water was for nobles only. So let's step away from that straw man. Food is MUCH easier than water to get.
I find it incredibly laughable, that any of the current clans that are open for business, would ever be in the situation of a starving newbie. (And since when has Arm EVER cared about starving newbies?) All it takes is 500 sids and a trip to the grocer by one of the aides, or even a semi-active couple of hunters, to keep a reasonably sized clan stocked. It wouldn't surprise me if people were going hungry in Havok's clan, even with 50000+ sids sitting around in various pockets and accounts (a conservative estimate, all together), cause they're saving it up for their next Salarri order.
If that's not working, then it's probably so overpopulated and poorly run, that the game will be done a favor if the stress causes some to leave and seek employment elsewhere, or else to cut away the dead chaff.
Maybe that's why some are so wedded to the idea of free food. It allows them to perpetuate poorly run clans by covering up the weaknesses that having a couple legitimately active and dedicated players would prevent. I'd rather things took a more Darwinian turn. There's so few open clans now, that I can't imagine it getting into this point anyhow. I'm not surprised Tuluki noble clans would have collapsed without it.
Heh, I feel like you're not in a mood to discuss things, but instead just argue blindly against anyone who disagrees with you. In the quote you used of me I said "food and water." not just water. Calling the whole point within a straw-man and waving it off without addressing it. And then you waved away my question about players with nobody around entirely by saying you think it's laughable that a newbie would ever be starving. But that's the thing. I never said they'd be starving. I just said they'd probably log out if they were hungry and nobody was on to get them food. You say that would never happen, but I've seen a few instances where no food was around in the AoD and nobody was around to get it at the time(even though there's more than enough people to be stockpiling it for ages if need be). This forces people to log off and only stick around when other people have re-stocked it. How is that adding anything to the game?
If people have a hard time stocking the AoD with food and water, when all they have to do is go to a free food/water vendor across the town. Why don't you think it will be possible for other clans to have the same problem, when they have a much harder job of going out into the dangerous wilds and hunting down animals just for 2 pieces of meat.
Quote from: Rhyden on May 17, 2015, 09:52:01 PM
I agree, but only for clans who normally have pc hunters. So mostly the GMH's?
If there are no pc hunters in one of these clans (which seems rare) it would give the leaders incentive to bring on new hunters, or hire experienced ones to feed their crafters, etc.
Could give clans more to do as a group, while experiencing that basic survival instinct that sometimes seems lacking in said clans. And if food and water begins to run out, then you have conflict while fighting over resources.
And if it's still too easy to live off food/water if implemented, we can talk about rot code...
Alright. So now you have a bunch of hunters, hunting to feed people. What has changed? They were already hunting for skins/hides/shells, most hunters I've known want to be hunting as much as possible to grind up their skills. They were already stockpiling the meat. If anything all you're changing is the frequency with which hunters -have- to hunt for the benefit of others in the clan instead of for themselves. What exactly is that adding to the game?
I don't even know what you're referring to, in half of the above, RGS. I'm not 'blindly' arguing anything. No more than you are. I'd caution against projecting anything about my mood. At least I'm coming up with better reasons than 'pretending to contribute' or 'a starving newbie', while ignoring someone that newbish should be in a clan I already said should keep its free food.
My assertion is that any reasonably active clan, that isn't grossly overpopulated, should have no difficulty whatsoever keeping full larders. There is more than enough characters seeking work, and more than enough sids to pay the grocers if that fails.
That's why I find the idea of some hungry newbie logging in, seeing an empty larder and logging off to be so incredibly unlikely. I admit that I am dismissing it, because I don't think it would happen often enough to be a meaningful point to stand on its own. Not with the clans being in their current state of concentration.
Do you remember logging into the game as a newbie and often logging off cause you were hungry? They should be in the Byn or Militia then, which I've already said, should keep their gruel.
As for your answer to Rhyden...What's changed is that what they're doing actually serves a purpose.
Quote from: MeTekillot on May 17, 2015, 10:22:49 PM
I have not been swayed by any of Clearsighted's arguments. Perhaps I blindly follow the automated food camp. I'd like staff to give us different ways to change the world with what we have now, instead of taking away what we have now and saying we're changing the world by keeping our clanmates fed by bashing in the brains of the nearest scrab.
Just out of curiosity, what other ways would you like staffers to give you? Because as I've described above, the automated food situation, when 'food' is essentially the only needed, essential commodity in the game, is why so many lower ranking hunters, aides and crafters lead relatively meaningless existences. Beyond what they can gin up for themselves as make believe.
Which again, would be more defensible an option, if the upper ranks didn't have to similarly rely on their imagination to meaningfully contribute. Perhaps bashing scrabs in is beneath you. But it's not to a lot of people.
Would one of these potential alternative ways involve the staff taking on a larger workload than unloading an NPC?
Yeah.
I can start a different thread if you like.
Quote from: MeTekillot on May 17, 2015, 10:45:15 PM
I can start a different thread if you like.
I'm genuinely interested, so go with whatever you feel is best. I give you permission to derail this one. It's up to you.
It wasn't a red herring, clearsighted, it was addressing an issue that I do have with your method of argument where you seem to be trying to belittle someone as a 'warning' to those in the same camp as he is. That he's 'delusional' for thinking this way.
As far as my contribution to the thread at hand, my statement before pointed to that things have been done the way you present before, and a few precious clans ended up getting a cook, which was -really- cool, particularly for my noble guards and such that had no way of securing food outside of either breaking their rules or paying for things themselves (to their own detriment). That spread across the game as a perk of being in a clan, which remains today, but as noted...clans are already suffering because that's not such a huge perk anymore.
The wilderness was tamed so that hunting became less dangerous than it used to be, when some of the revisions to wilderness zoning made it so that there was relatively 'safe' hunting. Not to zoning, I suppose, but how dangerous npcs wandered through those zones. I didn't shoot down your idea at all, I actually tried to say that it was just as viable because it -has- been done this way before. I think it was taken out because it became a hassle to people, including staff. 'We're out of food again.' 'What?! I just...stocked the shit out of that cupboard two weeks ago, I don't want to go buy a bunch more food, I have more enjoyable things in the game I'd rather be doing!'
There's actually a couple minor things that have huge differences between the time then and the time now, such as: It's relatively easy to find company as an indie now. Before, it was a lot harder to trust people to hunt with...there was the actual concern that someone was luring you outside the gates, and would attack you instead of the beast that came your way. Merchant house hunting groups were groups you could trust when you joined up, so people flocked to them for protection. The general aversion to what is referred to as 'meaningless pk' has resulted in a more cooperative playerbase and less of a need for 'honest business-oriented hunters' to band up with. But that's a derail for another time.
The point is...yes, this can work, economically speaking. No, I don't think it completely changes everything so much as restores the need for hunters, but I do not think it restores the need for hunters to join houses, which will likely end up problematic and your supply cap that you talk about might be lower than you think it is.
Edited to add: I.e. Yes, it works and has worked this way, but yes, it was also often a pain in the ass to play around.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 10:31:53 PM
I don't even know what you're referring to, in half of the above, RGS. I'm not 'blindly' arguing anything. No more than you are. I'd caution against projecting anything about my mood. At least I'm coming up with better reasons than 'pretending to contribute' or 'a starving newbie', while ignoring someone that newbish should be in a clan I already said should keep its free food.
My assertion is that any reasonably active clan, that isn't grossly overpopulated, should have no difficulty whatsoever keeping full larders. There is more than enough characters seeking work, and more than enough sids to pay the grocers if that fails.
That's why I find the idea of some hungry newbie logging in, seeing an empty larder and logging off to be so incredibly unlikely. I admit that I am dismissing it, because I don't think it would happen often enough to be a meaningful point to stand on its own. Not with the clans being in their current state of concentration.
Okay, so you don't think it's a point worth addressing even though I said I've seen it happen in a clan that currently has the model you want for more. That's fine, maybe it doesn't happen enough for you to worry about(even though we have no way of knowing how often it happens). I'll worry about it for the both of us.
Quote
Do you remember logging into the game as a newbie and often logging off cause you were hungry? They should be in the Byn or Militia then, which I've already said, should keep their gruel.
As for your answer to Rhyden...What's changed is that what they're doing actually serves a purpose.
You say it adds purpose but there was already a purpose, a much more fun purpose that doesn't fuck with playability. Collecting shells/hides for crafters to use, skilling up, or even just the act of killing NPC's itself can be fun and exciting. Forcing hunters to stockpile extra food and make extra hunting trips beyond what they're already doing? It enforces some realism by taking what players were already doing for fun and making it into a job(players don't want jobs, they want to play the game). All just so they can hold the lives of other clan-mates in their hands by making them the sole food/water providers in order to add a little realism at the sake of playability.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 10:10:59 PMNobles always need to have something for their people to do. It shocks me you don't realize this. Nobles should have no trouble giving an aide some sids every RL week or so, to go buy a ton of food and stock the larder with it. There's only a few noble houses open now. There's going to be some noble around, and it gives them something to have their F-me aide do. Conversely, it gives them a good reason to offer some exorbitant salary to hire a good hunter or two away from the merchant clans. This would make noble houses a natural destination. A player's career could easily span the Byn, to a merchant house, to a noble house. Nobles would be more picky, and the added pickiness would actually increase the desirability of the roles. Currently, noble houses often struggle to differentiate themselves from other organizations
I don't know what noble houses you've been playing around. Generally, I'd like to think that nobles have better things to do then send off their aides to routinely buy a bunch of food. Things like making contacts, plotting ways to foil their opponents in the political arena, setting up a spy network, planning awesome RPTs, and so on. The idea that a noble has no better plot to give then food-collecting is silly.
That said, a plot revolving around getting
special food items is different. A famous noble successfully did this, and
still had a clan cook! Why? Because they role-played having someone who just loved all sorts of food, especially rare delicacies. They hired hunters like you describe, and many of their aides were cooks. They even hired people just to cook for them, and make unusual or unique dishes. But that was a fun, focused experience. It wasn't sending someone down to buy food because they had to, it was taking the concept of food to a whole new level.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 10:39:50 PMJust out of curiosity, what other ways would you like staffers to give you? Because as I've described above, the automated food situation, when 'food' is essentially the only needed, essential commodity in the game, is why so many lower ranking hunters, aides and crafters lead relatively meaningless existences. Beyond what they can gin up for themselves as make believe.
Which again, would be more defensible an option, if the upper ranks didn't have to similarly rely on their imagination to meaningfully contribute. Perhaps bashing scrabs in is beneath you. But it's not to a lot of people.
I really don't understand why you feel that hunters, aides, and crafters have nothing to do if they don't have to go and get food and water. If their only value is to spam barter at the local food store (for the aides and crafters), then something has gone horribly wrong. Likewise, spam cooking is not all that interesting or engaging.
I can't comment on if hunters not finding a place to sell their food is actually an issue, but I've played PCs who were independent or who simply needed it who would buy it. So I guess from my perspective, that doesn't seem like a huge issue either. Maybe you have more experience there, though.
I want to apologize for the snarky way my original posts came off, talking about your mood or whatever. I like that this idea is being discussed, and don't want Clearsighted to think he's being ganged up on or anything like that. It's a good topic of discussion.
Quote from: Armaddict on May 17, 2015, 10:59:40 PM
It wasn't a red herring, clearsighted, it was addressing an issue that I do have with your method of argument where you seem to be trying to belittle someone as a 'warning' to those in the same camp as he is. That he's 'delusional' for thinking this way.
As far as my contribution to the thread at hand, my statement before pointed to that things have been done the way you present before, and a few precious clans ended up getting a cook, which was -really- cool, particularly for my noble guards and such that had no way of securing food outside of either breaking their rules or paying for things themselves (to their own detriment). That spread across the game as a perk of being in a clan, which remains today, but as noted...clans are already suffering because that's not such a huge perk anymore.
The wilderness was tamed so that hunting became less dangerous than it used to be, when some of the revisions to wilderness zoning made it so that there was relatively 'safe' hunting. Not to zoning, I suppose, but how dangerous npcs wandered through those zones. I didn't shoot down your idea at all, I actually tried to say that it was just as viable because it -has- been done this way before. I think it was taken out because it became a hassle to people, including staff. 'We're out of food again.' 'What?! I just...stocked the shit out of that cupboard two weeks ago, I don't want to go buy a bunch more food, I have more enjoyable things in the game I'd rather be doing!'
There's actually a couple minor things that have huge differences between the time then and the time now, such as: It's relatively easy to find company as an indie now. Before, it was a lot harder to trust people to hunt with...there was the actual concern that someone was luring you outside the gates, and would attack you instead of the beast that came your way. Merchant house hunting groups were groups you could trust when you joined up, so people flocked to them for protection. The general aversion to what is referred to as 'meaningless pk' has resulted in a more cooperative playerbase and less of a need for 'honest business-oriented hunters' to band up with. But that's a derail for another time.
The point is...yes, this can work, economically speaking. No, I don't think it completely changes everything so much as restores the need for hunters, but I do not think it restores the need for hunters to join houses, which will likely end up problematic and your supply cap that you talk about might be lower than you think it is.
Fair and valid points, Armaddict. I wasn't exactly calling
him delusional, though. Let me try and break it down to four essential points.
1) I think that given the hyper-concentration of clans at the moment, (which is more concentrated than it's been in the last decade) that the issues which made automated cooks a necessity for some clans (Halp, there's only 2-3 of us, and my Tuluki noble sponsor keeps storing!) are no longer as valid as they once were. Not when it essentially began as a stopgap measure to keep some noble houses afloat.
2) I can understand someone not wanting to be a hunter, or forced into a hunter role. There would still remain a wealth of options for them to join clans and not have to hunt. The only way I could see them being forced to hunt, would be if they joined a clan/tribe as a hunter. And that's just...something I guess they'd have to suck up. Them sucking it up is a lesser evil than hunters who don't have a real job to do.
3) Speaking of which...and this is where I apologize a bit. I have a kneejerk reaction to the 'be the change' type thinking, which really, is in many cases, so intellectually empty. I don't see a valid solution to the hunter quandary, to be 'pretending' I am contributing, when I'm really junking meat, since the meat bins are full. If that's the case, why even hunt at all? Why not just pretend I'm hunting? Why even leave the gates? Why do anything but keep myself fed, watered, and spar/mudsex all day long and -pretend- I'm doing what my actual in game job is? Because that's what Havoc's suggestion largely amounted to. At that point, I'm basically not playing a survival RPI anymore, I'm playing a MUSH or something. Isn't that sort've what Tuluk turned into?
I think this is a valid concern.
4) What makes #3 more onerous, is that it's not a two-way street. The higher ranks, such as agents and nobles, that would have to rely on you, don't actually need you. You're just a charity case, or someone they have to make busywork for, or whatever. In the end, you're dead weight. The health and sustenance of the clan does not even remotely rest on your shoulders. Meanwhile...the agent/noble/officer - they live rich and complex lives of responsibility and actual meaningful decisions. I've been on both sides of the fence. It's often been a pain in the ass to keep people occupied/entertained, because I didn't really
need them for anything, and I could hire as many people as I wanted, and it wouldn't matter if they were dead weight, or were a good fit with the clan. They brought precious little and took away less.
---
Now. If someone can look at any of the above points, and conclusively assert that it's completely baseless or false, then so be it. I think that would be hard to do, if someone were entirely honest with themselves. But what I feel are the underlying realities embodied in these four points, is why I considered 'being the change' to be a delusional prospect to consider. Not that Havoc himself was necessarily delusional. But he was asking someone else to be. A fine line, but an important one. I was not attacking him personally. But at the same time, I deeply disagree with his philosophy, as to what creates a healthier long-term playing experience.
And I say this while acknowledging that at one point, automated cooks did seem to have some necessity, when there were twice as many clans and less active players, and lots of turnover (In Tuluk especially, and among noble houses with like 1-2 people).
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 17, 2015, 11:11:58 PM
I want to apologize for the snarky way my original posts came off, talking about your mood or whatever. I like that this idea is being discussed, and don't want Clearsighted to think he's being ganged up on or anything like that. It's a good topic of discussion.
It's all good. And I really don't mind multiple people disagreeing with me. I especially don't mind if an old vet like you does. I just want to respond to each one. ;)
I did have a bitchy moment at Havoc, but it's because he's Tuluki.
I think I've played too many hunters in GMHs that had to junk too much meat and shells, from all the bins and storehouses always being stuffed, and over time, that has poisoned me against anything automated.
Eventually, it gets a bit stressful, knowing that it's not realistic to leave all this crap on the sands, but there's nothing to do with it. But what else would my ranger/hunter/patroller do? Just not leave the gates? Not play the game? I play Arm cause I enjoy riding in the wastes. It always would have felt nice, if I could actually bring that meat back, and have it used. I enjoyed doing that in clans which didn't have automated cooks, and I always found the dynamic much more tight-knit.
I remember when clans having their own viv was a big deal.
Quote from: Taven on May 17, 2015, 11:03:48 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 10:10:59 PMNobles always need to have something for their people to do. It shocks me you don't realize this. Nobles should have no trouble giving an aide some sids every RL week or so, to go buy a ton of food and stock the larder with it. There's only a few noble houses open now. There's going to be some noble around, and it gives them something to have their F-me aide do. Conversely, it gives them a good reason to offer some exorbitant salary to hire a good hunter or two away from the merchant clans. This would make noble houses a natural destination. A player's career could easily span the Byn, to a merchant house, to a noble house. Nobles would be more picky, and the added pickiness would actually increase the desirability of the roles. Currently, noble houses often struggle to differentiate themselves from other organizations
I don't know what noble houses you've been playing around. Generally, I'd like to think that nobles have better things to do then send off their aides to routinely buy a bunch of food. Things like making contacts, plotting ways to foil their opponents in the political arena, setting up a spy network, planning awesome RPTs, and so on. The idea that a noble has no better plot to give then food-collecting is silly.
That said, a plot revolving around getting special food items is different. A famous noble successfully did this, and still had a clan cook! Why? Because they role-played having someone who just loved all sorts of food, especially rare delicacies. They hired hunters like you describe, and many of their aides were cooks. They even hired people just to cook for them, and make unusual or unique dishes. But that was a fun, focused experience. It wasn't sending someone down to buy food because they had to, it was taking the concept of food to a whole new level.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 10:39:50 PMJust out of curiosity, what other ways would you like staffers to give you? Because as I've described above, the automated food situation, when 'food' is essentially the only needed, essential commodity in the game, is why so many lower ranking hunters, aides and crafters lead relatively meaningless existences. Beyond what they can gin up for themselves as make believe.
Which again, would be more defensible an option, if the upper ranks didn't have to similarly rely on their imagination to meaningfully contribute. Perhaps bashing scrabs in is beneath you. But it's not to a lot of people.
I really don't understand why you feel that hunters, aides, and crafters have nothing to do if they don't have to go and get food and water. If their only value is to spam barter at the local food store (for the aides and crafters), then something has gone horribly wrong. Likewise, spam cooking is not all that interesting or engaging.
I can't comment on if hunters not finding a place to sell their food is actually an issue, but I've played PCs who were independent or who simply needed it who would buy it. So I guess from my perspective, that doesn't seem like a huge issue either. Maybe you have more experience there, though.
All right. I guess no one here has ever played a leadership role in this game, where they often struggled to give their subordinates meaningful jobs instead of just busy makework.
When I was a leader, I used to make up to the hunters that the merchants sent in a special order, and we needed so and so, and I'd send them all around the world hunting, grebbing and such. Then when they brought it back, I'd go and quietly junk it, and tell them they did a great job. They at least, were thrilled.
I personally knew the merchants could request anything they liked, and have it loaded, regardless of what we brought in. But I didn't let the hunters know that. I admit, the charade left me feeling a bit hollow, and it did over time, sap my desire to play. It did make me turn more towards PvP scenarios, because at least antagonism with another player meant something.
Everyone was always thrilled to have something substantial and hands on to do. That's the biggest disconnect I'm feeling in this thread, that more people don't realize how important these little things are. Your average f-me aide would flip over having the responsibility of buying food for a noble house, with a sid allowance to ensure it stayed stocked. That would open a lot of RP for her, like seeking out indy hunters, or bakers/cooks.
Imagine a world where a noble aide has anything to do with an indy hunter besides hump them? Madness.
I'll go over things more in detail, but something I'd like a response to, in terms of your #4...
Couldn't that also be argued in the other direction? If you remember the Berlian/Lius era of Kadius, remember how when they died, it hurt the clan so deeply that it quickly faded? Do you consider it correct modeling, for the blue collar to become -so- important that one or two people make or break the clan, despite their blue collar position? They're a great merchant house. In the grand scheme of things, you -aren't- supposed to matter -that- much.
Quote from: Armaddict on May 17, 2015, 11:33:18 PM
I'll go over things more in detail, but something I'd like a response to, in terms of your #4...
Couldn't that also be argued in the other direction? If you remember the Berlian/Lius era of Kadius, remember how when they died, it hurt the clan so deeply that it quickly faded? Do you consider it correct modeling, for the blue collar to become -so- important that one or two people make or break the clan, despite their blue collar position? They're a great merchant house. In the grand scheme of things, you -aren't- supposed to matter -that- much.
It's a risk I'm willing to take.
But I honestly don't think it'd work out like that. If anything, it'll just create more RP and more meaningful decisions and significant responsibilities for the 'white collar' element, as they have to use their purse strings to either lure in more hunters, or set up some kind of deal with an indy outfit. Or just use their hundreds of thousands of unused obsidians and buy stuff from the grocer now and then. That will tide them over until someone else comes along to hunt scrab or bake flour. However it works out, they have the enormous satisfaction of making a huge impact on their clan's ongoing viability. It also didn't require staff interaction.
At least when they find the right people, both parties will feel mutually needed. Maybe Houses will become more selective, and let the Milita/Byn have the sweepings. Again, as weird as it sounds, the mere act of being more selective makes those clans more desirable to join.
But I think, given the current clan landscape of Armageddon...absent a dramatic change, such as the average peak falling from 70+ to 50+, and 10 more northern clans opening up, we're unlikely to see situations degenerate without there being a good reason for it. We're no longer in an era with like 12 open noble clans, with 1-4 people each. Lots of tribes have closed as well. So I'd wager those clans proved unable to sustain themselves with or without free food.
I think a lot of people badly underestimate how even the most token evidence of contributing has a huge morale boost. Any opportunity to make someone believe they are contributing is more precious than anything else, as far as stoking interest and attachment goes.
Most people cannot get as zen about it as HavocBlue. I don't think most people should be, without Arm losing something essential and becoming less an RPI and more a MUSH.
No thank you. I'd rather see existing food rot first. I think it would address your something to do point better and with less of a negative impact on city-based clan life, especially off-peak, than this idea.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 17, 2015, 11:25:28 PM
[stuff]
Everyone was always thrilled to have something substantial and hands on to do. That's the biggest disconnect I'm feeling in this thread, that more people don't realize how important these little things are. Your average f-me aide would flip over having the responsibility of buying food for a noble house, with a sid allowance to ensure it stayed stocked. That would open a lot of RP for her, like seeking out indy hunters, or bakers/cooks.
Imagine a world where a noble aide has anything to do with an indy hunter besides hump them? Madness.
Well, I can't comment on the leader and busywork portion. I haven't been in that position.
I can say that being in charge of stocking all general food is not something that really interests me, as someone who has played aides and clerks. I've been in a clan where we didn't really have a clan cook. Sure, sometimes cooking the food could have brief, entertaining moments. Mostly it was a lot of spam-crafting and sitting in the middle of the street catching my breath before I could lug the cistern further, though.
So yeah, I've actually experienced what you're advocating and didn't feel like it really added much. But as I've pointed out, you can get all the interaction you're advocating for without removing clan cooks and water, just by having the right leader PC and circumstances. And that RP was done very successfully, and I don't believe the PC advocating it ever felt it was empty--It was part of his PC's character.
I think it would need to be conditional, and part of the code:
The food hall would have a big food bin, that has code tied to the cook.
If the food bin has more than 20 pieces of food that do NOT have the word "charred" or "burnt" or "portion" in the sdesc, then the cook tells the PC to help themselves to what's in the bin.
If the bin has less than 20 pieces of that food, then the cook will release a few pieces of food. Leaders have unlimited access to the cook.
Also, the thing about stockpiling foods - this is an ongoing issue, and in my opinion it IS an issue in the merchant house clans. There are "bug-saves" in all the clans I've been in so far. What I mean is - you weed out all the crap on the table and when the game resets, it's all right back where it was. I've bugged it on and off for almost ten years, gave up bugging it. It's not a priority to staff, if it was they would've fixed it already.
So really, what player-leaders can do, is instruct recruits to do the cleanup of the food storage room. "All that meat in the shelves? That's all fuckin rotted. Toss half of it away, and find Stymie to bring the other half to that orphanage in the Rinth as our monthly "donation" heh heh heh."
I wanted to "weed out" some stuff in a GMH clan once and was instructed by the staff not to touch anything because my character wasn't authorized. But the ones who WERE authorized were just sitting on it and not doing anything about it. What's the point of being a hunter when you have no crafter PCs and your bin already has 47 duskhorn pelts and 50 gurth shells and 274 shards of obsidian?
The leader PC players need to take control of the excess and delegate the tasks of eliminating. "It's rotten, it's been there for months, it's attracting vermin, it smells bad" is a perfectly reasonable IC justification.
Eliminating auto-cooks is not the answer. Eliminating stockpiles is.
Quote from: Lizzie on May 18, 2015, 08:34:17 AM
What I mean is - you weed out all the crap on the table and when the game resets, it's all right back where it was. I've bugged it on and off for almost ten years, gave up bugging it. It's not a priority to staff, if it was they would've fixed it already.
Have you tried this since the update to how saves work? Since rooms saved more frequently, I could see this being less of a problem.
Quote from: valeria on May 18, 2015, 08:37:36 AM
Quote from: Lizzie on May 18, 2015, 08:34:17 AM
What I mean is - you weed out all the crap on the table and when the game resets, it's all right back where it was. I've bugged it on and off for almost ten years, gave up bugging it. It's not a priority to staff, if it was they would've fixed it already.
Have you tried this since the update to how saves work? Since rooms saved more frequently, I could see this being less of a problem.
It doesn't matter, it's a bug. The bug is - this table was initially saved 10 years ago with 200 pieces of random crap on it. And when the game resets, it will have exactly that same 200 pieces of crap on it.
Allow clan leader PCs to be able to "turn on/off" the cook based on the current food situation. If the cook is on, she does her thing. If the cook is off, she suggests you scrounge about the kitchen for some grub; she's busy.
I'm pro food rot code.
I'm pro no NPC cooks.
That is all.
I can see I'm a minority here. I'm someone who would like to see this in some limited fashion. I think it would have to be implemented more carefully than just unloading the cook NPCs, but I want to see something like this.
My reason is that staff encourages clan play, and also encourages the 'harsh and hostile desert environment where people kill each other over resources like food and water' theme, but those things don't really mix. Some clans should get pretty much unlimited food and water, but having all of them get it leads to city play in which everyone seems too 'comfortable.' Indies are often too rich to ever have to worry about food or water, and clanned PCs have access to infinite food and water, so who is struggling, really?
Get rid of the cooks in hunting clans. If there isn't sufficient food let the agents/merchants buy more until stores are restocked. (As wisely suggested above) But fresh clear water in all compounds
Also family members can give treats from the main kitchen
Quote from: Barzalene on May 18, 2015, 10:24:47 AM
Get rid of the cooks in hunting clans. If there isn't sufficient food let the agents/merchants buy more until stores are restocked. (As wisely suggested above) But fresh clear water in all compounds
This creates all the new problems I mentioned on the first page.
Forcing merchants/agents/whoever to go food shopping on a regular basis does not, in my opinion, add to anyone's experience in a positive way. If the end result is that Amos and Malik always have food in the bin when they need it, why does it need to be a menial chore for someone to handle?
If the argument in favor of forcing GMH hunters or (for some reason?...) noble aides to get their own food is that they need something to do... Well, as I believe has been mentioned prior in the thread, if you need coded motivation to hunt for food to eliminate boredom, there are some other issues at hand.
Change how clan cooks work. Instead of being cooks they are quartermasters and oversee the kitchen stock and supplies.
If you give them an item of food, it is now available via 'list'. There is NO LIMIT to how many of each item you can give them.
There is no cost involved in buying the food, you get no money for giving them the food. They simply store it and catalog it.
The food will be stored exactly as-is, raw or cooked.
The food list will be subject to vNPC purchases, so it will gradually deplete over time, even if no PCs are using it.
PC cooks are now a viable role as you will want someone who can cook up the raw food and make meals.
>give root quartermaster
A kitchen quartermaster accepts a roasted reddish root and adds it to the stores.
>list
A kitchen quartermaster has the following food available:
1) A few roasted reddish roots
2) Many grilled pink slabs of meat
3) Some raw hunks of white meat
4) Several thin green tubers
>buy #2 quartermaster
A kitchen quartermaster gives you a grilled pink slab of meat.
Trust me, there will be enough food. "Back in the day", clan cooks were valuable because you got way less from skinning an animal. Hunting was far more dangerous and difficult. Clan cooks as they currently work are now essentially obsolete.
As for noble houses and other areas where it makes sense, their kitchens can be set to re-populate automatically with a "delivery" of food, removing the necessity of PC hunters or Aide busy-work as they no doubt have deals worked out with various supply sources.
During times of famine, those deliveries can be made less frequently, or be of lower volume, to reflect the harder times.
There is a hide vendor in Blackwing that works exactly like I have in mind, except this would be a no-money exchange.
You could actually extend this to having quartermasters for the clan halls too. For animal parts, raw materials, cloth, etc. A basic amount of whatever makes sense would always be available, but anything extra would be supplied by the PCs and used by PCs and vNPCs alike, the frequency based on how much virtual demand there currently is.
To note the "plot" concerns:
Merchant House storage rooms don't get filled up because people are bored and searching for meaning in their life. They get filled up because their players naturally want to work on their character's skills, and the only way to do that outside sparring is to hunt stuff, and it would be ridiculous to leave all that food out to rot in the desert in a supposedly resource-scarce world.
You can do skill-gain and survival-related activities and have a perfectly healthy plot-life, the two are not mutually exclusive.
None of this feels like it would actually change anything, and if it did it wouldn't change anything for the better, but instead just make things tedious without good reason.
Hunting clans are already going out and getting meats. How do we even know taking away cooks would make it a struggle? How do we know the amount of meats and foods hunters already bring in isn't enough for everyone to stay fed? What would be the point of doing this if everyone still had food, because hunters are already hunting. On the flip side, if there isn't enough food currently brought it and it did add struggle, what would the point of that struggle be? What would it add to the game? IF all it's adding is more hunters having to run out and kill scrabs to stuff into bins, that really not adding anythign meaningful or fun. It's just adding busywork.
If you want to see people in clans struggle, food really isn't the option that makes sense to facilitate that struggle. Taking food away from indies(making it more expensive or harder to find) or making them struggle to eat. That makes sense to me. But people in clans? I don't see how it's realistic that people in clans would suddenly have to skip meals or have a hard time feeding themselves. The whole purpose of clanned life is to get away from that sort of struggle. If you want clans to fight over resources give them resources that players actually feel the incentive to fight over, like metal. Making them fight or struggle for food just seems arbitrary.
TL;DR: Will getting rid of food vendors in hunting clans change anything? If it does change anything, will that change make sense and make the game more fun? Probably not, and no.
Just going to point out again that there are already clans that require PCs to gather their own food and water as well as food and water to support clanmates.
A couple people have mentioned that the change would reinforce the idea of Zalanthas as a harsh world where food and water are hard to come by, but I can almost guarantee that is not how it will play out in game. You're either going to be fortunate and rolling in food because you managed to hire that pair of active dwarf rangers who lay waste to the wildlife every time they ride out, or someone is going to be stuck with the menial, mindnumbing chore of going to the store every few days, putting "BUY FRUIT" in their prompt, and holding it down for ten seconds.
I can say with 100% certainty that the hunting crew of Amos Salarr and the hunting crew of Malik Kadius will not end up coming to blows over who gets to skin that scrab and who gets to go hungry.
Trust me, we aren't going in the direction of forcing clans to provide their own food/water any time soon.
If anything we are moving the exact opposite direction of that sort of system as fast as we possibly can.
Because people bitched a moaned about things like the Byn not having replenishing water... Because it sucked, both for leaders and underlings. I agree if anything we're going in the other direction. Thank god for that.
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 18, 2015, 10:56:14 AM
Just going to point out again that there are already clans that require PCs to gather their own food and water as well as food and water to support clanmates.
A couple people have mentioned that the change would reinforce the idea of Zalanthas as a harsh world where food and water are hard to come by, but I can almost guarantee that is not how it will play out in game. You're either going to be fortunate and rolling in food because you managed to hire that pair of active dwarf rangers who lay waste to the wildlife every time they ride out, or someone is going to be stuck with the menial, mindnumbing chore of going to the store every few days, putting "BUY FRUIT" in their prompt, and holding it down for ten seconds.
I can say with 100% certainty that the hunting crew of Amos Salarr and the hunting crew of Malik Kadius will not end up coming to blows over who gets to skin that scrab and who gets to go hungry.
If we were discussing this four months ago, I'd agree.
But I think we also all thought the "WHAT IF TULUK WAS CLOSED?" discussions were silly too. ;)
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 11:03:02 AM
Because people bitched a moaned about things like the Byn not having replenishing water... Because it sucked, both for leaders and underlings. I agree if anything we're going in the other direction. Thank god for that.
I always liked the fact the T'zai Byn made you get your own water and enjoyed doing that as a clan leader.
I was actually pretty disappointed when this change went in.
Re: what would it change & busy work complaints:
Hunters could see their contribution and improve their corner of the gameworld,
Clans where it makes sense would always have a "delivery" or a basic collection of food items,
The main difference is that by giving the food to the cook it will be gradually depleted by the vNPCs and not rotting in a bin for 1000 years,
Another difference is you'd have more variety of food whenever the hunters are active (while your pc can survive on gruel every day a real person would get awfully bored with that)
Another benefit is that the food is stored all in one place rather than in 5 different chests and tables which removes some of the "organize the clan hall" busy-work.
edit:
You could extend this idea to the crafting hall and have a quartermaster NPC who handles all the hides and bones and etc as well - and would have those things be used up by vNPCs as well - the problem in clan halls is never the scarcity of items but the overabundance of them. And the hours wasted trying to keep them organized.
I've added this to the original post.
Forgive typos; typing on phone.
I like Delerium's idea for GMH-like clans, but not for noble houses. It seems like a good compromise. But no one has yet convinced me that food resources should be scarcer in noble house clans for any reason (or that noble houses sold be forced to hire hunters or buy their own food).
Quote from: Delirium on May 18, 2015, 11:11:38 AM
Re: what would it change & busy work complaints:
Hunters could see their contribution and improve their corner of the gameworld,
Clans where it makes sense would always have a "delivery" or a basic collection of food items,
The main difference is that by giving the food to the cook it will be gradually depleted by the vNPCs and not rotting in a bin for 1000 years,
Another difference is you'd have more variety of food whenever the hunters are active (while your pc can survive on gruel every day a real person would get awfully bored with that)
Another benefit is that the food is stored all in one place rather than in 5 different chests and tables which removes some of the "organize the clan hall" busy-work.
Forgive typos; typing on phone.
First, I want to say I agree with you.
However, I want to point out that not only are we not about to make Houses provide their own food....no matter how useful it would make hunters and cooks/crafters feel.....we are about to put in NPC's that let Houses bypass hunters and crafters entirely to fill entire orders for goods.
The focus isn't shifting towards making House employees feel useful in a realistic sense. If anything the focus is shifting towards making those roles even more of a flavor role than they are now.
Is that a good thing or bad thing for the game? I don't know. We will have to wait and see how it works out.
Okay, so I like Delirium's idea quite a bit. But only if it's added in addition to a water source and food NPC, in order to avoid the problem of clannies going hungry/thirsty if no hunters are around.
Valeria: my idea covers your concerns. Noble Houses would always have a basic list of food available. So would GMH to am extent just lower quality for peons and better for Family members. My idea is more about organizing and using up the contributions the hunters make. Because that is the root of the problem the stuff just sits there. That is what causes the disconnect.
Desertman: see above. The idea is to let hunters contribute to the stuff available for crafters and feel their contributions are being used (even if only virtually by the vnpc purchases) so it mixes fine with the all-item vendors. The diconnect is when the stuff brought in just rots on a wooden worktable for uncounted Ages because there is more than the non-virtual population can handle.
Essentially my idea us not about removing food options but limiting them and adding quartermaster npcs who have a basic stock of items but who also accept what's given to them by house hunters as extra stock. Their extra stock is then depleted on a regular basis by vNPCs who are using it for the vNPCs needs. whether that is food or hides or stones.
Wouldn't you love to never have to organize the clan hall or junk 19383838 rocks again?
So the idea here is just to have an NPC there to auto-junk the excess food hunters are bringing in (which is really all of it because no food they bring in now is even needed) but we will roleplay it is being eaten by the VNPC/NPC population? The real gain here being someone doesn't have to junk the excess food regularly and it doesn't pile up on shelves.
Sure, I'm fine with that. I can't see that it would hurt anything.
I would prefer a universal food rot code myself as I feel that adds more to the game, but I am very pro-realism and in the minority.
Yes and no. Options for peons would be limited but enough to prevent starvation due to lack of support PCS because starving in the middle of a crowded clan hall is just as dumb as having 283 slabs of stringy meat in a chest.
Quote from: Delirium on May 18, 2015, 11:53:06 AM
Yes and no. Options for peons would be limited but enough to prevent starvation due to lack of support PCS because starving in the middle of a crowded clan hall is just as dumb as having 283 slabs of stringy meat in a chest.
Don't most clans already have limited options for peons and separate cooks entirely for higher ranked officers/family members?
More limited for peons. but you're focusing on essentially irelevant details now and missing the larger focus of the idea.
Again the root of the problem is the way things are now there is a logical disconnect with supply+use, due to non-virtual items not being used by virtual people and vice versa.
The problem is not limited to food, it is a larger problem caused by the idea of being part of a massive organization.
My idea solves that problem by providing a base amount of supplies for clanned people while using up excess that would not realistically lay around unused.
Another benefit to that idea is that it would be easier to reflect supply + demand on a virtual level; make the vNPC sales much higher during times of tribulation and famine and make them lower during times of plenty. But there would always be "many roasted tubers" available. Or "many chunks of grey rock". Or "many tan leather hides". Etc, etc. Use NPCs to be the gateway between the virtual/non-virtual worlds.
Please remember this is an example not an idea I've actually had time to sit down and officially write up.
phone keyboards suck.
I think the quartermaster idea is interesting, especially for clans that do gather their own foodstuffs. But there are some coded issues with quartermasters as they stand:
-- Currently, quartermasters are not subject to VNPC sales. So they never deplete things.
-- Maintaining more than a few items on a quartermaster becomes nightmarish. But the list of food items that could potentially be offered to a quartermaster is ginormous. That's not really sustainable.
-- It would be cool if PCs could give lesser-value things to the quartermaster and get tokens to buy higher-value things in return. E.g. Malik brings in 10 crappy hides, he can get 1 better hide to work with (which was put there by another PC). But that's not the way the quartermasters work right now.
So yeah, it's a really neat idea, but it's not currently very do-able. The quartermaster script that we use would have to be substantially rewritten, with an emphasis on ease of maintaining it staff-side. In comparison, the cook script we use right now is very simple, thus it's easy to set up and maintain.
Talia: take a look at the Blackwing Outpost NPC hide vendor/seller. The long-legged one at the stall. That's the one I based my idea off of.
If the code there is limited to obsidian transactions, you could have the quartermaster PC give out a very small amount of obsidian per item and charge an equally small but slightly higher amount to purchase. 1 sid per food item, 2-5 sid to buy, etc. "maintenance fee" or whatever IC reason you want to come up with, if any at all. That'd also mean hunters get a tiny bonus for being active and contributing.
Crafters could turn in their crafted items to the right quartermaster for a tiny bonus as well, offsetting the purchase cost.
I like the idea of tokens instead of obsidian coins, but that might get a little too complicated. Mt goal was to find a relatively simple solution that fixes the current problem to reasonable satisfaction without adding in an insane amount of legwork to implement.
Quote from: Talia on May 18, 2015, 12:36:40 PM
I think the quartermaster idea is interesting, especially for clans that do gather their own foodstuffs. But there are some coded issues with quartermasters as they stand:
-- Currently, quartermasters are not subject to VNPC sales. So they never deplete things.
-- Maintaining more than a few items on a quartermaster becomes nightmarish. But the list of food items that could potentially be offered to a quartermaster is ginormous. That's not really sustainable.
-- It would be cool if PCs could give lesser-value things to the quartermaster and get tokens to buy higher-value things in return. E.g. Malik brings in 10 crappy hides, he can get 1 better hide to work with (which was put there by another PC). But that's not the way the quartermasters work right now.
So yeah, it's a really neat idea, but it's not currently very do-able. The quartermaster script that we use would have to be substantially rewritten, with an emphasis on ease of maintaining it staff-side. In comparison, the cook script we use right now is very simple, thus it's easy to set up and maintain.
Why not just make a system where it takes the quality of the food submitted (how full it makes you, ie well cooked or raw,burnt). Because the code already has some value assigned to those differences and make it keep track of that value and have the npc offer more depending on how high that value is?
So if I'm joe hunter and I can also cook and enter in five grilled scrab steaks that equal five food points a piece, I could then buy in the list feature a delicately roasted kank bottom that costs 20 food points with 5 left.?
Quote from: Delirium on May 18, 2015, 12:40:28 PM
Talia: take a look at the Blackwing Outpost NPC hide vendor/seller. The long-legged one at the stall. That's the one I based my idea off of.
I can't look at him right now and may forget when I'm in game again, but if he's doing what you've described, then he's probably using some old, Blackwing-specific script that is not the current generic quartermaster script. (That is a very common thing, for stuff in the older corners of the world to not be up-to-date on their scripting.) (For example, the AoD has quartermasters that are all on very old scripts and should be switched over, but it takes a ton of staff time to fix this kind of thing, and when it's not exactly broke we don't prioritize fixing it.) You're just going to have to trust me on this--quartermasters are a bitch to maintain. Personally, if I was running a GMH, I wouldn't want to commit to using quartermasters to receive and dole out food items. Setting them up, maintaining them, and debugging them is crazy difficult as it stands. So, like I said--interesting idea, but we really don't have the coded resources to do this right now.
For starters, "we ran out of food" just should never ever happen in GHM or noble clans. It just wouldn't make sense, so why change things to allow that to become a very real possibility?
I think back on my experiences in clans without automated water or automated pay. When the clans were buzzing with activity, maybe it didn't make much of a difference. (Although the pay issue was always a pain in the ass for everyone, I'm pretty sure.) But as soon as you get mismatched play schedules, lulls in activity, absent leadership, etc., then those things can become major hassles. (Some major hassles are fun. These are not among them, IMHO.)
Consolidated player base or not, without clan cooks, there would be GHM and noble clans dealing with lack of food for silly reasons, in defiance of any common sense. Not all the time, but it would happen.
You may be thinking that actually sounds like fun. Well, good news. You can experience that in independent clans already. No policy change needed; it's all right there waiting for you.
P.S. I totally agree that hunter contributions should matter. Along with every other clan role's contributions. I just don't think taking away clan cooks is the way to obtain that, for GMH and noble clans.
P.P.S. I like the idea that Delirium shared.
Quote from: Talia on May 18, 2015, 12:52:04 PM
Quote from: Delirium on May 18, 2015, 12:40:28 PM
Talia: take a look at the Blackwing Outpost NPC hide vendor/seller. The long-legged one at the stall. That's the one I based my idea off of.
I can't look at him right now and may forget when I'm in game again, but if he's doing what you've described, then he's probably using some old, Blackwing-specific script that is not the current generic quartermaster script. (That is a very common thing, for stuff in the older corners of the world to not be up-to-date on their scripting.) (For example, the AoD has quartermasters that are all on very old scripts and should be switched over, but it takes a ton of staff time to fix this kind of thing, and when it's not exactly broke we don't prioritize fixing it.) You're just going to have to trust me on this--quartermasters are a bitch to maintain. Personally, if I was running a GMH, I wouldn't want to commit to using quartermasters to receive and dole out food items. Setting them up, maintaining them, and debugging them is crazy difficult as it stands. So, like I said--interesting idea, but we really don't have the coded resources to do this right now.
Maybe I'm just being obtuse, but it doesn't seem like it'd be that difficult to copy the NPC and set its item types or values differently.
It'd at least be nice if the idea were investigated a little more than being almost immediately shot down with "it'd probably be too hard".
Quote from: Desertman on May 18, 2015, 10:59:53 AM
Trust me, we aren't going in the direction of forcing clans to provide their own food/water any time soon.
If anything we are moving the exact opposite direction of that sort of system as fast as we possibly can.
Yes. And I've found the more things are automated and made easier, the more tedious (not less tedious) and boring the game becomes. Until there is virtually nothing else to do but sit around RP ala a MUSH, with only artificial or superfluous reasons to endanger your character. It's not like the merchants/agents in a clan actually need your materials or meats. They can whatever they want loaded up.
They don't even need PC guards, as they have NPCs for that as well. The game has really gotten to a point, where it's been finessed to make existence for a tiny 1-3 person noble house or clan branch, function as easily as possible. But I think we're past that era, and the contrivances to make it work are no longer necessary. There are no longer 2 branches to every House, and there's a whole raft of tiny, underpopulated clans that are closed now.
Quote from: flurry on May 18, 2015, 12:52:45 PM
For starters, "we ran out of food" just should never ever happen in GHM or noble clans. It just wouldn't make sense, so why change things to allow that to become a very real possibility?
I think back on my experiences in clans without automated water or automated pay. When the clans were buzzing with activity, maybe it didn't make much of a difference. (Although the pay issue was always a pain in the ass for everyone, I'm pretty sure.) But as soon as you get mismatched play schedules, lulls in activity, absent leadership, etc., then those things can become major hassles. (Some major hassles are fun. These are not among them, IMHO.)
Consolidated player base or not, without clan cooks, there would be GHM and noble clans dealing with lack of food for silly reasons, in defiance of any common sense. Not all the time, but it would happen.
You may be thinking that actually sounds like fun. Well, good news. You can experience that in independent clans already. No policy change needed; it's all right there waiting for you.
P.S. I totally agree that hunter contributions should matter. Along with every other clan role's contributions. I just don't think taking away clan cooks is the way to obtain that, for GMH and noble clans.
P.P.S. I like the idea that Delirium shared.
It wouldn't be a realistic possibility, especially for the GMHs in their current state. Again, most stuff gets junked, vendored or left on the sands, because there isn't any room for it. But it would be amazing to have something to do, now and then.
I've been part of many clans that relied on getting our own food. None ever risked starvation. There's a substantial portion of the playerbase that takes great pleasure in stockpiling food and keeping everyone sustained. Then they join a GMH as a hunter, and realize there is ironically, no need for their services at all. A lot get bored and turn to making an indy crew, because of this.
I think everyone agrees that city-based military-type clans, such as the Militia and Byn should still get their mess hall gruel. That's an essential component of the Militia/Byn experience, and vital for new players. And oh hey, a perk for joining the Militia. I think getting more people to go from the Byn to the Militia and noble houses as bodyguards, instead of the GMHs, would be an improvement too.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 01:18:11 PM
There's a substantial portion of the playerbase that takes great pleasure in stockpiling food and keeping everyone sustained. Then they join a GMH as a hunter, and realize there is ironically, no need for their services at all.
I was under the understanding that the hunter branches of the GMHs exist not to feed the GMH's crafters (they have nearly bottomless coin, they can BUY food easily) but to supply the raw materials with which to make things.
And that the food brought in was more incidental than the point of the role.
Perhaps if you want a clanned hunter who supplies food for a clan of pcs without a clan cook, don't tribes not have clan cooks, and also have a need for hunters?
We have two arguments going on here.
A) What if we run out of food and then our people starve!?!?!
B) We have so much food and need new code to do away with all of the vast amounts of food!?!?!?
I guess the easiest solution is magic-instant-npc's.
The best solution? Probably not. The easiest. Yes.
Just tell your hunters to stop bringing in food because realistically you aren't using it and you don't need it.
Is that IC'ly jarring for a hunter? Yes. Is it still an IC fact? Yes.
Quote from: bardlyone on May 18, 2015, 01:21:31 PM
I was under the understanding that the hunter branches of the GMHs exist not to feed the GMH's crafters (they have nearly bottomless coin, they can BUY food easily) but to supply the raw materials with which to make things.
In theory. In practice, it usually works out to not be the case.
Quote from: bardlyone on May 18, 2015, 01:21:31 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 01:18:11 PM
There's a substantial portion of the playerbase that takes great pleasure in stockpiling food and keeping everyone sustained. Then they join a GMH as a hunter, and realize there is ironically, no need for their services at all.
I was under the understanding that the hunter branches of the GMHs exist not to feed the GMH's crafters (they have nearly bottomless coin, they can BUY food easily) but to supply the raw materials with which to make things.
And that the food brought in was more incidental than the point of the role.
Perhaps if you want a clanned hunter who supplies food for a clan of pcs without a clan cook, don't tribes not have clan cooks, and also have a need for hunters?
As any clanned hunter can tell you, not even the materials they bring in are necessary. Not really. It's a tiny bit better these days than it used to be, owing to the master craft situation. There was a time when there was virtually no master crafts. Over the last half decade, quite a few interesting things have come into the game as being added to clan craftables. So every now and then, there's a real need. Since more often than not, those have to be crafted, and are often really cool!
But the majority of the stuff is still basically loaded at will, and the remainder essentially serves to help crafters skill up on, and no other purpose.
And again. Food/hunger and water/thirst is literally the only commodity that every player needs met, and which must always be sated. I think it throws the economy dramatically out of whack when two of the most important issues in a survival RPI are made completely irrelevant to the majority of players.
There's plenty of sids in the game, but people just let it rot in Nenyuk or save it up for their tenth Salarri weapon, since they'll never need to use it to fill a waterskin or buy a meal.
I'm all for newbs/militia getting Mess Hall gruel. I'm all for dainty nobles, in our currently restricted (and highly improved) noble atmosphere, getting whatever they want. I'm not necessarily in favor of noble employees getting what they want, unless the noble PCs pay them.
But at a minimum, GMHs should lose automated food.
I think the time is right, with the dozen+ underplayed clans recently closed, to introduce a bit more of the survival element into this RPI. Because it's gotten a bit silly. And it might not have a dramatic effect right away (RGS seems to think nothing will change). But that goes both ways, in that it's unnecessary to take those jobs and responsibility out of PC hands as well.
Quote from: Desertman on May 18, 2015, 01:23:13 PM
Just tell your hunters to stop bringing in food because realistically you aren't using it and you don't need it.
Is that IC'ly jarring for a hunter? Yes. Is it still an IC fact? Yes.
The fact that hunters don't need to bring in food for the cooks is not an IC fact at all. It's an OOC fact.
Quote from: flurry on May 18, 2015, 01:31:01 PM
Quote from: Desertman on May 18, 2015, 01:23:13 PM
Just tell your hunters to stop bringing in food because realistically you aren't using it and you don't need it.
Is that IC'ly jarring for a hunter? Yes. Is it still an IC fact? Yes.
The fact that hunters don't need to bring in food for the cooks is not an IC fact at all. It's an OOC fact.
And equally jarring.
Realistically the NPCs/VPNCs need to eat. Just like crafters don't just make goods to sell to PCs, it makes sense that hunters would feed others besides PCs.
Quote from: flurry on May 18, 2015, 01:31:01 PM
Quote from: Desertman on May 18, 2015, 01:23:13 PM
Just tell your hunters to stop bringing in food because realistically you aren't using it and you don't need it.
Is that IC'ly jarring for a hunter? Yes. Is it still an IC fact? Yes.
The fact that hunters don't need to bring in food for the cooks is not an IC fact at all. It's an OOC fact.
What flurry and Molten Heart said. That's why my solution focused on a way to solve BOTH problems, not just one of them.
The actual niggly details of implementation can and surely will vary, but I think it's worth looking into for the long-term gains of making clan life more interesting, fun, and sustainable - and less of an OOC hassle met with frequent IC/OOC disconnects.
Even if it's something as simple as storage rooms which re-set periodically to wipe out extra items and re-stock a basic inventory.
I think people are underestimating the amount of players who would love to be tasked with these chores. Not every player. Admittedly not me. But there is always a minion who enjoys these tangible contributions.
Clearsighted:
You're supposing things never shift back to 2 cities and require all these changes to be undone, first off - which has already been said, it's possible Tuluk will be reopening and that's why the closure was not an IC thing.
You're also supposing that everyone who plays has the same experiences as you. This is a new account for me, but I've had an account before. And I can tell you I've gone hungry on MULTIPLE clanned pcs. And gone without water on them. Because of the changes you want implimented being the way it was already. And guess what. Other people have posted the SAME EXPERIENCE.
I get you want what your hunter to do to seem more meaningful. I do. I'm just selfish enough to tell you that I know where your suggestions go, and it's not fucking fun to be the asshole who gets shafted because you happen to be up playing at 3 am and everyone who can go out and bring in the 6 animals worth of meat you will go through during your login time for food, has not decided to stock the larders.
Given the lack of pay at entry level in most clans, food, water, and a footlocker are the ONLY perks. Do you really think it will be beneficial or help clans in ANY right to get rid of 2/3 of what they offer? Do you think it will somehow increase interest in them? It's not hunting for your own food that makes indy outfits fun. It's the fact that the top dogs are pcs. And this change won't do anything to make the situation any different with regards to that.
You know how I know? I've been there, done it, seen it, and know how it shakes out.
It'd be cool is food could go bad.
Food isn't the only problem though. I think we've all seen a storage room that has an ungodly amount of .. well... everything, in it.
I can't think anything cooler than characters fighting for food and water. Maybe smart-phones.. but that's another setting.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 01:30:26 PM
But the majority of the stuff is still basically loaded at will, and the remainder essentially serves to help crafters skill up on, and no other purpose.
I think that depends on your House. I know one in which every item sold that is craftable is crafted by PCs and the materials are gathered by PCs for said items.
I do however agree that clan cooks for the peons/outside folks could be gotten rid of without any issues. No one is going to starve. I am one who believes that the more activities you have, even if they might seem boring, the better. It's not the end result of your hunt for food that matters, it's the journey to do it. When I was in the 'Byn I used to force folks to actually cook and RP putting their cooked meat/tubers into the stew. Then I would blame them for making it taste bad when they burned it.
Quote from: Delirium on May 18, 2015, 01:45:08 PM
Food isn't the only problem though. I think we've all seen a storage room that has an ungodly amount of .. well... everything, in it.
Agreed.
Quote from: Gaare on May 18, 2015, 01:46:26 PM
I can't think anything cooler than characters fighting for food and water. Maybe smart-phones.. but that's another setting.
Not even, say, clans fighting over rare resources related to their actual business ventures, as opposed to the food and water that have -IC- been guaranteed and promised as part of joining for more than half a decade in most clans that recruit?
Even characters that are unable to scavenge food, lack the ability to use a weapon, can't leave the gates, and aren't receiving pay for RL weeks but are supposed to be in a luxe, cushy job with an organization that is vastly wealthier than a noble house?
Alright, that's where you find your fun, I get it. Where is the part wherein it lines up with ACTUAL IC REALITY? Especially given that one of the biggest selling points of joining clans for those who are NOT around at peak times is NOT HAVING TO DO THE VERY THING YOU PROPOSE?
Quote from: Barzalene on May 18, 2015, 01:39:36 PM
I think people are underestimating the amount of players who would love to be tasked with these chores. Not every player. Admittedly not me. But there is always a minion who enjoys these tangible contributions.
This. I know the completely jaded APM crowd is beyond this, and more fixed on their next nilazi, sorc, noble or what have you (being a bit tongue in cheek here)...Not that there's anything wrong with that. Hey, they've earned it.
But the majority of players are still hunters, mercs and grebbers. Even those that have been playing 10+ years, are still drawn bound to blue collar roles. And a lot of them (Although as Havoc has demonstrated, not all of them), would rather their hunters actually be hunting and contributing, than pretending to be. Because this is still an RPI survival MUD.
Personally, I think automated food has forced more people out of the GMHs than brought them in. It's the whole phenomena of the indy crew, as the GMHs do eventually get extremely boring, if there is no agent or leadership in place that is creative enough to make busywork or cool plots to replace their automated jobs.
Anyways. The real draw for most 'blue collar' players who join GMHs, is having a locker and access to better gear. Not free food, which merely cheapens the experience.
Wars are fought over resources like food. Why not in Zalanthas? The problem is it's supposed to be a harsh world with few resources but that isn't well represented in the game world which has a lot of resources available to the individual.
I'm skeptical of the "there's people who'd actually like to do this" argument. People say the same thing about slave rolecalls (including big threads about how totes cool they are), but when Staff open them up they only get one or two applications.
Everyone having to scrounge for food follows a similar model in my mind: it sounds like a cool idea that fits with this harsh desert world our characters live in, but when faced with actually having to execute on it and work within the limitations the concept proscribes, we realize it's a pain in the ass.
Crazy idea: pick a clan and give it a try for a month.
Quote from: bardlyone on May 18, 2015, 01:52:40 PM
Quote from: Gaare on May 18, 2015, 01:46:26 PM
I can't think anything cooler than characters fighting for food and water. Maybe smart-phones.. but that's another setting.
Not even, say, clans fighting over rare resources related to their actual business ventures, as opposed to the food and water that have -IC- been guaranteed and promised as part of joining for more than half a decade in most clans that recruit?
No. Because it's a RPI game and fighting for a resource is not the most important part of it. It's -how- you fight for a resource. Still food and water should be most valuable resource of all. If a character joins a clan and there is free food and water (surely there must be such clans), then that should really mean something. Characters should fight each other for that position.
PS. What Delirium suggests is very smart.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 02:05:19 PM
I'm skeptical of the "there's people who'd actually like to do this" argument. People say the same thing about slave rolecalls (including big threads about how totes cool they are), but when Staff open them up they only get one or two applications.
Everyone having to scrounge for food follows a similar model in my mind: it sounds like a cool idea that fits with this harsh desert world our characters live in, but when faced with actually having to execute on it and work within the limitations the concept proscribes, we realize it's a pain in the ass.
What are you talking about? The reality of having to actually scrounge for our food is the reality that every non-clanned player already follows. It's not an unrealistic pain in the ass. It's not analogous to playing an iso-slave role, and deals with the game's only true universal economy (hunger). It's one of the core themes of the game that many people are drawn to and find deeply attractive (survival).
Many players don't join clans (or leave them) precisely because they enjoy that experience. Others soldier on and deal with it, because hey, there's lockers.
If this isn't your cup of tea, it would likely never affect you. Not unless you wanted to join a GMH as a hunter, and never actually hunt. But if that's the case, I feel no pity. Already, GMH hunters have little better to do than tavern sit and train.
The other 'combatty' GMH roles, such as the elite units that do have something else that is meaningful to do, are closed to PCs.
People are acting like their f-me is going to have to go fight a scrab, instead of getting their mekillot steak from the cook. But that's not the case. It's only going to affect hunters, and there are far more than enough hunters to feel these needs. (
And hell, as a side bonus, maybe some bored hunters will stop bitching about having the elite GMH units opened again).
If what you are saying is taken to its logical conclusion, then why have hunger and thirst at all? Why not just be a MUSH?
Some old ideas:
Virtual-refill water barrel: every OOC hour it doubles the amount of water it has in it due to "virtual efforts". If it's empty, it stays empty. But if players go out and collect water and dump it in the barrel -- and hold off for a while -- they'll soon have plenty of water until the next big binge (for a trip or something).
Virtual-refill food crate: every OOC hour, as long as it has some other piece of food in it, it adds a few rations until it's full. If it's empty it stays empty (and so on).
I guess the idea is that resource collection and rationing would then need to be things players did, but not to a ridiculous and time-consuming extent.
There are other scripts that are more generic that
might work that way if you just know how that one script works. For instance, take the one that we are using for player-created clan shopkeepers. The reason that it will work for player-created clan shopkeepers is that there is going to be one PC to set up on the shopkeeper, with possibly one or two changes down the line...and that's it. It is fire and forget. This won't work for a clan where multiple people might need access to change things, or where quartermaster PCs might change on a regular basis. You could also reference that hide buyer script (which has been around since 2002), but that is geared specifically to that one scenario (it is for taking hides and giving money). It has some other stuff in there that would be unnecessary to this overall desired goal, and if we were going to use either of these to do something, we would probably note them, then have a new script written up that takes these advantages into account while allowing more modular setup.
This leaves us with either:
- change things now using what we have with player-created clan shopkeepers, increasing staff workload now to frontload the script changes to at least a dozen or so situations, and also increase staff workload indefinitely as we need to add/remove clannies with script modifications.
- hack away at one or both of the above scripts, neither of which are intended to be used as quartermaster scripts (meaning they want to sell things, they don't want to provide things for free). This is possible, but ultimately not the route we like to go down.
- add it to the list of things we want to do right, listing features we would want, player experience integration that we like, thereby needing no more staff involvement after initial setup
We almost always prefer the third option. It takes longer, but we get a better product that we are much happier with implementing.
Heheh, foraging for tubers as something "meaningful." It'd be a chore, nothing more.
I never said it was unrealistic, either. Just a pain in the ass. Keeping the larders stocked is a tedious business no matter how realistic it is. Would you read a novel where a sizable portion of the pages are dedicated to the characters doing the same chores over and over again?
Finding resources to compete over is well and good, but surely we can do better than people fighting over potatoes and springwater. Relatively sophisticated societies and organizations don't evolve to fight at that scale. We should be fighting over farmland and trade routes and markets and mines (or some random magical doohickey). Nevermind that with current forage code, all you'd see are some hunters trudging out to the nearest forage room and spam-foraging up enough stuff to keep them alive for the rest of the week.
Quote from: Nyr on May 18, 2015, 02:36:07 PM
There are other scripts that are more generic that might work that way if you just know how that one script works. For instance, take the one that we are using for player-created clan shopkeepers. The reason that it will work for player-created clan shopkeepers is that there is going to be one PC to set up on the shopkeeper, with possibly one or two changes down the line...and that's it. It is fire and forget. This won't work for a clan where multiple people might need access to change things, or where quartermaster PCs might change on a regular basis. You could also reference that hide buyer script (which has been around since 2002), but that is geared specifically to that one scenario (it is for taking hides and giving money). It has some other stuff in there that would be unnecessary to this overall desired goal, and if we were going to use either of these to do something, we would probably note them, then have a new script written up that takes these advantages into account while allowing more modular setup.
This leaves us with either:
- change things now using what we have with player-created clan shopkeepers, increasing staff workload now to frontload the script changes to at least a dozen or so situations, and also increase staff workload indefinitely as we need to add/remove clannies with script modifications.
- hack away at one or both of the above scripts, neither of which are intended to be used as quartermaster scripts (meaning they want to sell things, they don't want to provide things for free). This is possible, but ultimately not the route we like to go down.
- add it to the list of things we want to do right, listing features we would want, player experience integration that we like, thereby needing no more staff involvement after initial setup
We almost always prefer the third option. It takes longer, but we get a better product that we are much happier with implementing.
I'm confident staff can come up with the right solution, to fit the changing landscape of the game.
1) The solution could be as simple as starting with the GMHs, and leaving the nobles and military alone. (I think everyone believes the Militia/Byn should always have their gruel, as that's a central theme of being a soldier. Communal eating of gruel). I'm okay with the nobles having it automated, although I do think the game would be better off if we returned to when they only got free water (which no one else did).
At least GMH player bloat would be kept down, and they'll become a bit more selective. I know staff has in the past, disliked it when those clans became mini-Byns. More players will find their way into more logical roles (House bodyguards, Militia etc), who truly do want the sedentary, tavern-sitting experience. GMHs have amazing perks gear wise, so there'll never be a lack of people wanting to join them, no matter what. Nobles and the Militia employers will benefit. GMH hunters will benefit.
2) Ideally, there should be massive crates/bins, that various raw materials need to find their way into, every 1-2 RL months, and if not filled, then the overseeing staffer can tweak the warehouse vendor to increase the prices of the stuff it sells. (As I understand it, each vendor has a variable that can be tweaked to change the cost of everything they sell). If it is filled, then the items can just be junked, carried off by VNPCs, and prices stay the same.
Some players might disagree with 1 and 2, but I think we can agree that on the scale of staff burden, they are practically nonexistent. And might even reduce staff work. At the very least it'll let staffers know how their clans are really doing.
I think this is the major thing bothering me about this thread: I've played several clanned characters and had staff give me zero guff about junking excess resources, including food. So it's a tedious chore you don't want to do... that's about how I feel about the thought of having to go spam buy food because my clan has no hunters. Why is avoiding your idea of tedium more valuable than avoiding my idea of tedium? (With the exception of Lizzie's broken table).
Quote from: valeria on May 18, 2015, 03:01:55 PM
I think this is the major thing bothering me about this thread: I've played several clanned characters and had staff give me zero guff about junking excess resources, including food. So it's a tedious chore you don't want to do... that's about how I feel about the thought of having to go spam buy food because my clan has no hunters. Why is avoiding your idea of tedium more valuable than avoiding my idea of tedium? (With the exception of Lizzie's broken table).
Because arbitrarily junking stuff for no reason
kills immersion. As a hunter, I'm not going to be able to empty my clan's food bins (stuffed since 2007) and junk it, just to pretend I'm contributing to it. When I was a leader, and had to find stuff for our hunters to do, I always felt stupid doing it (and hid the fact from the players beneath me, who would have instantly lost interest in my quests, if they knew it was pitying makework). Being the one that had to junk stuff to let others keep having fun, was a soul-killing burden I took upon myself. What happens usually is the bins just stay full forever.
I have every sympathy for your f-me aide, but I don't think she'll be affected. I'm fine with the noble houses keeping their automated food (for the nobles). I personally think, that most aides would enjoy having the responsibility and they'll be missing out.
I get that some people are so jaded with the game, as to be beyond all survival aspects of it, and simply wish hunger and thirst was turned off, so they could emote all day. I personally, still want to play an RPI MUD (your idea of tedium), not a MUSH (my idea of tedium).
Even if noble houses were affected (which they should be, but I'm willing to compromise), sending someone to the grocer with 500 sids, is not a great burden. And I find it hilarious that you think it is. You probably also hate having to ask the cook for food and eat it as being equally tedious.
Meanwhile, there's no realistic possibility of Salarr, Kadius or Kurac not having enough eager and willing hunters. Not when the coded benefits of the restricted gear those clans offer is so superior. And any tribes that are getting free food, should stop getting free food (wouldn't surprise me if the Sun Runners were).
Quote from: valeria on May 18, 2015, 03:01:55 PM
I think this is the major thing bothering me about this thread: I've played several clanned characters and had staff give me zero guff about junking excess resources, including food. So it's a tedious chore you don't want to do... that's about how I feel about the thought of having to go spam buy food because my clan has no hunters. Why is avoiding your idea of tedium more valuable than avoiding my idea of tedium? (With the exception of Lizzie's broken table).
I'm with you. But its the kind of thing I can delegate to a minion, and they'll be important and trusted with a job. Maybe they'll steal the sid and I can hunt them down and kill them. Its beautiful.
There sure are some silly generalizations being made about people who don't like the idea of removing cook NPCs.
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 18, 2015, 03:17:58 PM
There are sure are some silly generalizations being made about people who don't like the idea of removing cook NPCs.
Agreed.
If NPC cooks are removed, I suggest NPCs that sell food be added.
All I can say is that there are clans you can join right now to experience the "no automated food or water" in-city clan experience. It's tedious for the leaders to have to restock with food and water. And it's downright unplayable for any underlings who can't get a hold of leaders when the food and water runs out. Starve or log out. The only difference I see for GMH's is that it either won't effect them at all, because they will have tons of food stockpiled becuase they're already out hunting. Or it will cause hunters to have to do more of what they're already doing, only now it's becomes a chore they have to get done for others, repeatedly, for the rest of their career.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 03:22:28 PM
All I can say is that there are clans you can join right now to experience the "no automated food or water" in-city clan experience. It's tedious for the leaders to have to restock with food and water. And it's downright unplayable for any underlings who can't get a hold of leaders when the food and water runs out. Starve or log out. The only difference I see for GMH's is that it either won't effect them at all, because they will have tons of food stockpiled becuase they're already out hunting. Or it will cause hunters to have to do more of what they're already doing, only now it's becomes a chore they have to get done for others, repeatedly, for the rest of their career.
I don't know that you're not right. That's why I think it would be neat to try other thing for a finite period. Trying thing that don't need coding first, makes sense to me.
Hey guys, fair warning - please don't flame bait in these threads. Thanks!
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 18, 2015, 03:17:58 PM
There sure are some silly generalizations being made about people who don't like the idea of removing cook NPCs.
It's fine. But I find your idea of pretending to be hunting and contributing when you're actually not, to be equally silly.
I also dislike people exaggerating the effect it will have on them, when in all likelihood, unless they specifically sought out a role as a hunter, it never would. So it rings false, when people begin to panic, as if their aide is going to have to hunt a scrab.
The most logical and common sense approach, is to assume, like Barzalene, that these responsibilities will find their way to the people that want them. The halved number of clans makes this more likely. There are no elite GMH units to detract from these responsibilities either.
Know what I do when I have extra food or resources that I want to get rid of? I junk them, but put in a command emote saying I'm handing them over to the Quartermaster/cook/whoever. Maybe it breaks your immersion, but for me it's the same as going out to the desert to kill spiders "to keep their numbers down." Animals numbers don't actually rise and fall based on PC (in)actions, it's just the server resetting.... But I'm able to separate that OOC notion and interpret the game as my character should be.
If you're a hunter who doesn't feel like he's contributing, go out and hunt anyway. Junk your food by turning it in to the Quartermaster. You'll be feeding virtual employees and accomplishing the same task as if a PC was eating your food.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 03:45:42 PM
Animals numbers don't actually rise and fall based on PC (in)actions
Technically, they do. There is utility to be found in keeping the roads safe. And such patrols as there are, mostly revolve around that real need. Kurac at least, has a good thing going, since it makes sense to keep the way safe to Luirs.
I was quite pleased when the North Road between Nak and Luirs got destroyed.
This thread f'in exploded.
Just wanted to reiterate that this is how things used to be, and no one is going to starve to death, and aides do, essentially, end up with an additional duty of keeping track of food stocks and what not. Which is a pretty important job.
I would just approve the idea outright, I think, except I'm still concerned that there's players like me. I don't play clanned hunters because I don't need to. There aren't any raiders to deal with. I can gauge safety of at rip fairly easily. I don't have huge expenses. I can -sell- food for great profit and feed myself.
This change incentivizes HIRING hunters, but it doesn't incentivize BEING a house hunter. Rules and shit? When I can do it all on my own? Can offer me as much coin as you want and I'll make more, but now your free food and water thing is moot, your barracks is unnecessary, and I don't need buddies because the wilderness is not that dangerous. *makes an obnoxious shrug at house hiring rep*
I like noble houses having cooks, though.
Quote from: Armaddict on May 18, 2015, 04:03:30 PM
This thread f'in exploded.
Just wanted to reiterate that this is how things used to be, and no one is going to starve to death, and aides do, essentially, end up with an additional duty of keeping track of food stocks and what not. Which is a pretty important job.
I would just approve the idea outright, I think, except I'm still concerned that there's players like me. I don't play clanned hunters because I don't need to. There aren't any raiders to deal with. I can gauge safety of at rip fairly easily. I don't have huge expenses. I can -sell- food for great profit and feed myself.
This change incentivizes HIRING hunters, but it doesn't incentivize BEING a house hunter. Rules and shit? When I can do it all on my own? Can offer me as much coin as you want and I'll make more, but now your free food and water thing is moot, your barracks is unnecessary, and I don't need buddies because the wilderness is not that dangerous. *makes an obnoxious shrug at house hiring rep*
I like noble houses having cooks, though.
Good points, here Armaddict. I'd only add, that in my experience at least, free water and a safe locker has always been the main draw, with the added benefit of extremely potent clan-restricted gear. And free stabling. That and the camaraderie/training. In the top 5 reasons to join a GMH, I don't think free food would make the list, even at the moment.
Maybe it's worth a poll. (i.e, where would you rate: free water, safe locker, restricted gear, free stabling, camaraderie, specialized training, housing, salary, free food, RPTs, on a list of your most cherished benefits from joining a clan).
you can get free wood pretty easily
just roll up a female PC
ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 04:18:28 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on May 18, 2015, 04:03:30 PM
This thread f'in exploded.
Just wanted to reiterate that this is how things used to be, and no one is going to starve to death, and aides do, essentially, end up with an additional duty of keeping track of food stocks and what not. Which is a pretty important job.
I would just approve the idea outright, I think, except I'm still concerned that there's players like me. I don't play clanned hunters because I don't need to. There aren't any raiders to deal with. I can gauge safety of at rip fairly easily. I don't have huge expenses. I can -sell- food for great profit and feed myself.
This change incentivizes HIRING hunters, but it doesn't incentivize BEING a house hunter. Rules and shit? When I can do it all on my own? Can offer me as much coin as you want and I'll make more, but now your free food and water thing is moot, your barracks is unnecessary, and I don't need buddies because the wilderness is not that dangerous. *makes an obnoxious shrug at house hiring rep*
I like noble houses having cooks, though.
Good points, here Armaddict. I'd only add, that in my experience at least, free water and a safe locker has always been the main draw, with the added benefit of extremely potent clan-restricted gear. And free stabling. That and the camaraderie/training. In the top 5 reasons to join a GMH, I don't think free food would make the list, even at the moment.
Maybe it's worth a poll.
Erm. That's not the issue at all. Hunters won't join up for free food. You listed what their incentives are. But in the absence of hunters, that leaves...other people scrounging, which means every hiring dry spell turns into PC's of a merchant house struggling to get by, using their pay for food, etc etc. That was the point of the story, not the hunter's plight. The hunters don't have a plight right now. Houses do.
Quote from: Armaddict on May 18, 2015, 04:23:05 PM
But in the absence of hunters, that leaves...other people scrounging, which means every hiring dry spell turns into PC's of a merchant house struggling to get by, using their pay for food, etc etc. That was the point of the story, not the hunter's plight. The hunters don't have a plight right now. Houses do.
Wait, wait. In the absense of hunters the merchant or agent or lead crafter withdraws house funds and buys some raw goods, I would think!
Buy food from indy hunters.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 04:18:28 PM
I'd only add, that in my experience at least, free water and a safe locker has always been the main draw, with the added benefit of extremely potent clan-restricted gear. And free stabling. That and the camaraderie/training. In the top 5 reasons to join a GMH, I don't think free food would make the list, even at the moment.
Maybe it's worth a poll. (i.e, where would you rate: free water, safe locker, restricted gear, free stabling, camaraderie, specialized training, housing, salary, free food, RPTs, on a list of your most cherished benefits from joining a clan).
Not everyone HAS YOUR experience. And if I had to rate -my- motivations for joining a clan, in order:
free water
free food
housing - limited and available outside clans as well as in them.
rpts - neato if you can get to attend them - which I often can't because usually I can't be around during peak time
restricted gear - something I have never come across as a benefit in over half a decade of playing clanned as often as not, so moot in plenty of cases.
camraderie - moot point if you have no one ever on and around when you are
safe locker - unless someone decides to rob it - its in a communal space after all
free stabling is irrelevant - guess what, your hunter may like that, but crafters, aides, and any other city bound role but the Byn typically doesn't need a mount, so moot
specialized training is a moot point - even hopping clans aren't hopping when no one else is around when you are so no training
salary - less than indies can make, which is good because as an indie you DO have to buy food/water unless you're a hunter, but still way not enough to motivate someone to join a clan when you go at least a year without pay up front
Quote from: bardlyone on May 18, 2015, 04:33:14 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 04:18:28 PM
I'd only add, that in my experience at least, free water and a safe locker has always been the main draw, with the added benefit of extremely potent clan-restricted gear. And free stabling. That and the camaraderie/training. In the top 5 reasons to join a GMH, I don't think free food would make the list, even at the moment.
Maybe it's worth a poll. (i.e, where would you rate: free water, safe locker, restricted gear, free stabling, camaraderie, specialized training, housing, salary, free food, RPTs, on a list of your most cherished benefits from joining a clan).
Not everyone HAS YOUR experience. And if I had to rate -my- motivations for joining a clan, in order:
free water
free food
housing - limited and available outside clans as well as in them.
rpts - neato if you can get to attend them - which I often can't because usually I can't be around during peak time
restricted gear - something I have never come across as a benefit in over half a decade of playing clanned as often as not, so moot in plenty of cases.
camraderie - moot point if you have no one ever on and around when you are
safe locker - unless someone decides to rob it - its in a communal space after all
free stabling is irrelevant - guess what, your hunter may like that, but crafters, aides, and any other city bound role but the Byn typically doesn't need a mount, so moot
specialized training is a moot point - even hopping clans aren't hopping when no one else is around when you are so no training
salary - less than indies can make, which is good because as an indie you DO have to buy food/water unless you're a hunter, but still way not enough to motivate someone to join a clan when you go at least a year without pay up front
Very interesting list. I wouldn't mind hearing more people's takes on it.
For me, it's more like:
1) locker, 2) stabling (saves me from always having to get out 20 sids!), 3) camaraderie, 4) training, 5) gear (it's out there - and glorious)
I too have a schedule that rarely allows me the luxury of a big RPT.
Quote from: flurry on May 18, 2015, 01:31:01 PM
Quote from: Desertman on May 18, 2015, 01:23:13 PM
Just tell your hunters to stop bringing in food because realistically you aren't using it and you don't need it.
Is that IC'ly jarring for a hunter? Yes. Is it still an IC fact? Yes.
The fact that hunters don't need to bring in food for the cooks is not an IC fact at all. It's an OOC fact.
It's an IC fact. The cooks are supplied by tons of OTHER VNPC hunters in the background, which is why those NPC cooks will be there giving out food even if there are no PC hunters in the clan.
The fact there are vast hordes of VNPC hunters providing food to the clan means that the food the PC hunters are providing is IC'ly not needed.
Can you argue, "Well, every little bit helps.", sure you can...but the raw fact is, even without PC hunters, the food is still coming in and WILL still be there from VNPC hunters....so...not needed.
Now, that aside, the fact is the players of those PC hunters know on an OOC level that what they are doing is pointless, not needed, and will just be junked.
PC hunters enjoy knowing that what they are doing is pointless about as much as PC merchants enjoy placing orders repeatedly for items and feeling like vending machines I imagine.
Then again, I am very "accomplishment" driven. I like for my accomplishments to be measurable. Some people might be just fine and happy with "virtually accomplishing something" instead of actually accomplishing something. That's not for me and I get nothing out of it.
The only possible "benifits" I see people espousing for the idea of removing food/water sources in clans is to have more incentive to hire hunters. And have more reason for hunters to hunt stuff. And to enforce the brutal reality that food and water are scarce.
None of these "benifits" are realistic enough justification to do this. Clans shouldn't be the place representing how little food/water there is in the world, they should be the exception to that brutal reality. GMH houses already have plenty of incentive to hire hunters, and hunters have plenty incentive to hunt. So besides those three things what does removing food/water sources do for the game?
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 04:45:59 PM
The only possible "benifits" I see people espousing for the idea of removing food/water sources in clans is to have more incentive to hire hunters. And have more reason for hunters to hunt stuff. And to enforce the brutal reality that food and water are scarce.
None of these "benifits" are realistic enough justification to do this. Clans shouldn't be the place representing how little food/water there is in the world, they should be the exception to that brutal reality. GMH houses already have plenty of incentive to hire hunters, and hunters have plenty incentive to hunt. So besides those three things what does removing food/water sources do for the game?
One benefit would be that I would enjoy it.
Would it be good for the game as a whole is another question that I don't have a good answer for and that I'm not qualified to even answer.
Either way, I have to admit I am arguing for my side of it because I am biased to wanting things I would enjoy.
Okay, that's actually something I can understand. Which parts would you enjoy about it? The idea of having a specific goal for you character to log into a work towards? The idea of scarcity in clans and people struggling? Something else? I'm sure whatever it is you like about the idea can be retrofitted into some other idea that isn't quite as ham-fisted as completely removing automated food/water.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 04:37:28 PM
Very interesting list. I wouldn't mind hearing more people's takes on it.
For me, it's more like:
1) locker, 2) stabling (saves me from always having to get out 20 sids!), 3) camaraderie, 4) training, 5) gear (it's out there - and glorious)
I too have a schedule that rarely allows me the luxury of a big RPT.
I PMed you a bit more of my reasoning as it might've been a bit over the line to share it publicly on the forums, but I can understand if others have other priorities. Hell, mount stabling's never been a real concern of mine, as most of my hunter pcs have done so on foot, but I see where public stables would get old quick for the stabling fees if you have a pc who is using them RL daily or multiple times a day. Last time I was in a clan, it's been less than a RL month, #3 never happened as I saw others from my clan a combined total of times which I can count on my fingers without repeating a finger, and #4 actually relied on the NPC cook which is another part of my position here. #5 is... something a good 100 pcs of mine have managed never to be granted or come across. Outside the real basic livery you're forced into in a clan at least. The locker was super handy and part of why most of my clanned pcs never try and get their own place historically, unless they want to live with someone. I've had stuff stolen before though, so would consider it more a matter of free storage than secure storage. I do get how different played experiences would lead you to different opinions though on these things.
Quote from: Barzalene on May 18, 2015, 04:27:11 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on May 18, 2015, 04:23:05 PM
But in the absence of hunters, that leaves...other people scrounging, which means every hiring dry spell turns into PC's of a merchant house struggling to get by, using their pay for food, etc etc. That was the point of the story, not the hunter's plight. The hunters don't have a plight right now. Houses do.
Wait, wait. In the absense of hunters the merchant or agent or lead crafter withdraws house funds and buys some raw goods, I would think!
That's what I'm talking about though. This leads to things hemorrhaging in ways that are, in actuality, kind of an unrealistic way for them to hemorrhage, while also bringing back some mundane tasks that don't add too much. However, if the indie hunter role gets curbed back to make a clanned hunter the way to be as it once was, this all changes.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 04:45:59 PM
The only possible "benifits" I see people espousing for the idea of removing food/water sources in clans is to have more incentive to hire hunters. And have more reason for hunters to hunt stuff. And to enforce the brutal reality that food and water are scarce.
That's about it, yes.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 04:52:57 PM
Okay, that's actually something I can understand. Which parts would you enjoy about it? The idea of having a specific goal for you character to log into a work towards? The idea of scarcity in clans and people struggling? Something else? I'm sure whatever it is you like about the idea can be retrofitted into some other idea that isn't quite as ham-fisted as completely removing automated food/water.
Honestly, I don't see a way to enforce food and water scarcity, so long as food remains automated and free. By the way, people are starving. Now go stuff your face with six chalton steaks, and pack a couple dozen more for the trip, Recruit.
It's more impressive that Zalanthas doesn't have an obesity epidemic.
I like gathering resources sometimes. What do people want to be doing? Tavern sitting? Not everyone can be involved in high level plots. Someone has to be the minion.
Quote from: bardlyone on May 18, 2015, 04:53:04 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 04:37:28 PM
Very interesting list. I wouldn't mind hearing more people's takes on it.
For me, it's more like:
1) locker, 2) stabling (saves me from always having to get out 20 sids!), 3) camaraderie, 4) training, 5) gear (it's out there - and glorious)
I too have a schedule that rarely allows me the luxury of a big RPT.
I PMed you a bit more of my reasoning as it might've been a bit over the line to share it publicly on the forums, but I can understand if others have other priorities. Hell, mount stabling's never been a real concern of mine, as most of my hunter pcs have done so on foot, but I see where public stables would get old quick for the stabling fees if you have a pc who is using them RL daily or multiple times a day. Last time I was in a clan, it's been less than a RL month, #3 never happened as I saw others from my clan a combined total of times which I can count on my fingers without repeating a finger, and #4 actually relied on the NPC cook which is another part of my position here. #5 is... something a good 100 pcs of mine have managed never to be granted or come across. Outside the real basic livery you're forced into in a clan at least. The locker was super handy and part of why most of my clanned pcs never try and get their own place historically, unless they want to live with someone. I've had stuff stolen before though, so would consider it more a matter of free storage than secure storage. I do get how different played experiences would lead you to different opinions though on these things.
I replied to your PM, and I think the situation you described, is like the Byn and Militia, a worthy exception for important thematic reasons that supersede the arguments being made here. Soldiers and mercenary companies are supposed to have their communal gruel. Another clan might be in a similar situation.
(GMHs have no important thematic reasons, by contrast, as at least half the clan, by any conservative estimate, revolves around supplying and hunting).
Quote from: Clearsighted
Honestly, I don't see a way to enforce food and water scarcity, so long as food remains automated and free. By the way, people are starving. Now go stuff your face with six chalton steaks, and pack a couple dozen more for the trip, Recruit.
It's more impressive that Zalanthas doesn't have an obesity epidemic.
This is only the case for clanned pcs. Which aren't representative of the whole game world, or even the whole pc experience. It's entirely possible to play a PC on the edge of starving. The best way to do it is to be city based and not join a clan, line most of the virtual world.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 04:59:33 PM
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 04:45:59 PM
The only possible "benifits" I see people espousing for the idea of removing food/water sources in clans is to have more incentive to hire hunters. And have more reason for hunters to hunt stuff. And to enforce the brutal reality that food and water are scarce.
That's about it, yes.
This seems like a slipshod way of accomplishing those things. Surely there are better ways that don't end up having the possible problems I've already gone on about.
You want food/water to be scare, get rid of the watering-hole right outside the major city. Make forage not be a free way to get food at novice levels. Add food rot.
You want hunters to have more reasons to hunt? Add in rare, unique animals in far-strung places that have cool materials which provide unique properties. Add in a new predatory species that is driving out diversity and needs to be hunted to restore balance. Throw in some plots, don't delete code and add possible problems.
You want GMH's to have more incentive to hire hunters? Why? Hunters are probably the most common character type in the game. Even mercs and soldiers become glorified hunters 75% of the time. There are never any lack of hunters. GMH's consistently get players and have merchants who need to hire players to go out and get materials for them. Throw in all those incentives to hunt I put above, and you'll have more incentive to hire anyways.
Quote from: KankWhisperer on May 18, 2015, 05:08:54 PM
I like gathering resources sometimes. What do people want to be doing? Tavern sitting? Not everyone can be involved in high level plots. Someone has to be the minion.
You don't need to take away food/water sources in clans to get people to gather resources.
Quote from: valeria on May 18, 2015, 05:14:22 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted
Honestly, I don't see a way to enforce food and water scarcity, so long as food remains automated and free. By the way, people are starving. Now go stuff your face with six chalton steaks, and pack a couple dozen more for the trip, Recruit.
It's more impressive that Zalanthas doesn't have an obesity epidemic.
This is only the case for clanned pcs. Which aren't representative of the whole game world, or even the whole pc experience. It's entirely possible to play a PC on the edge of starving. The best way to do it is to be city based and not join a clan, line most of the virtual world.
I tend to agree with this. And the only one of the GMH's that doesn't have specific foodstuffs involved in their business is Salarr. Kurac has all sorts of candies and cakes, albeit with spice, and part of Kadius' whole shtick is 'delicacies' (it's right in the help file) which translates to 'fine foods'. And perhaps ironically, Salarr is the one who would have the smallest amount of issue/struggle with this, because they regularly need bone and leather to make their goods, as opposed to silk and rocks for kadius, or sandcloth and spice for Kurac. And it's typically Salarr that has the most excess meat anyhow. Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing this happen with Salarr, but with the other GMH's, it seems dubious at best, as to the benefit to gameplay for more than a small handful of people who say they would enjoy it, as opposed to at least as many if not more, who don't want to worry with it.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 05:15:02 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 04:59:33 PM
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 04:45:59 PM
The only possible "benifits" I see people espousing for the idea of removing food/water sources in clans is to have more incentive to hire hunters. And have more reason for hunters to hunt stuff. And to enforce the brutal reality that food and water are scarce.
That's about it, yes.
This seems like a slipshod way of accomplishing those things. Surely there are better ways that don't end up having the possible problems I've already gone on about.
You want food/water to be scare, get rid of the watering-hole right outside the major city. Make forage not be a free way to get food at novice levels. Add food rot.
Hah. That seems like a slipshod way of ensuring you can only play in clans. It's vastly more satisfying to go out and forage up water, or creep warily into a local watering hole and furtively fill a waterskin. That's an iconic survival RPI/Armageddon experience. Does anyone else remember how they first felt, when they began playing and found water in the wilderness? Anyways. I'm talking about food. I don't mind clans keeping water as their perk (i'd rather they didn't, but I don't expect everything to be as I like it, only some of the things!)
I can't imagine you're actually advocating removing the one or two waterholes left in the game, and all the great RP and tension that often surrounds them, in favor of automated clan water.
The rest of your ideas, and food rot, sounds good. But I can't really believe you'd advocate the above.
Also, there's about 0 chance of an obesity epidemic. When you consume primarily or solely protein, your body starves. 'protein starvation'. Look it up, it's a real thing.
As long as food is available to purchase within the city, you don't even need hunters to go hunt things. One decently-branched merchant could bankroll an entire clan's food and water expenses, and still be rich.
The problem is when the city's shop resources start to get scarce, and you get noble clans fighting over dumb shit like whose merchant gets the "rights" to sell silk goods at the Kadius shop, or when you have nobles paying templars to jail that Bynner subclass knife-maker for maxing out the sale of yellow, blue, red, silver, purple, green, orange, and gold throwing knives that the noble's aide was using to manage the food payroll. I mean, yeah, that's conflict or whatever, but it's not really the kind of shit that noble clans should be involved with, if you ask me.
The second problem is that the logistics of the situation would be pretty fucking annoying. You'd have to have a widely accessible food/water storage location for everyone in your clan, which could easily lead to everyone in your clan getting poisoned by one retarded twink, or you'd have your middle-management constantly doling out snacks from the pantry like some kind of fucking kindergarten teacher.
Quote from: Synthesis on May 18, 2015, 05:44:25 PM
The problem is when the city's shop resources start to get scarce, and you get noble clans fighting over dumb shit like whose merchant gets the "rights" to sell silk goods at the Kadius shop, or when you have nobles paying templars to jail that Bynner subclass knife-maker for maxing out the sale of yellow, blue, red, silver, purple, green, orange, and gold throwing knives that the noble's aide was using to manage the food payroll. I mean, yeah, that's conflict or whatever, but it's not really the kind of shit that noble clans should be involved with, if you ask me.
Dude. That sounds
awesome to me. I pray for the day something like that happens in Arm. I'm sure there are a few dozen rostered Tuluki nobles that would have enjoyed anything half so interesting to do.
More fun if we can call them Scoobie snacks!
Nobles fighting over the right to sell knives to merchants would be like the President of Russia and the United States fighting over a parking space at McDonalds.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 05:58:03 PM
Nobles fighting over the right to sell knives to merchants would be like the President of Russia and the United States fighting over a parking space at McDonalds.
This would also be awesome, though.
Quote from: Armaddict on May 18, 2015, 06:00:37 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 05:58:03 PM
Nobles fighting over the right to sell knives to merchants would be like the President of Russia and the United States fighting over a parking space at McDonalds.
This would also be awesome, though.
It would be below them and totally realistic, regardless how awesome you think it is, though.
If the problem is that hunters are feeling like they are flavor roles, and what their JOB IS is to provide MATERIALS NOT FOOD to craft, then clearly the problem to solve for their uselessness lies in making the clan only items craftable and not loading them, and FORCING PCS to gather the damn materials for it or you don't get your order. Not in taking out 2/3 (or even 1/3) of the tenuous precious few material benefits you get with every clanned role for the sake of fixing a problem that is rooted in something else entirely.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 03:45:42 PM
Animals numbers don't actually rise and fall based on PC (in)actions
Technically, they do.
This is unfounded. It'd be interesting to see proof or have staff confirm this.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on May 18, 2015, 05:15:02 PM
You want food/water to be scare, get rid of the watering-hole right outside the major city. Make forage not be a free way to get food at novice levels. Add food rot.
I thought it'd be cool if some outfit started selling this water.
The thick and short figure in a brown sandcloth cloak says in sirihish: 'Water is fifty coins, all you can drink. What no coins? Drop your pack or bend over!"
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 05:58:03 PM
Nobles fighting over the right to sell knives to merchants would be like the President of Russia and the United States fighting over a parking space at McDonalds.
Not even remotely. We're not talking Tektolnes or a black robe. We're talking about run of the mill, low ranking player noble here. A tiff, started by their aides, is perfect. A perfectly flippant reason to have a Templar screw over some poor Bynner.
Anyways. I'm sure Putin has done worse, for more banal reasons. And in Armageddon, he'd be a paragon of justice.
Quote from: Molten Heart on May 18, 2015, 06:09:45 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 03:45:42 PM
Animals numbers don't actually rise and fall based on PC (in)actions
Technically, they do.
This is unfounded. It'd be interesting to see proof or have staff confirm this.
You can confirm it yourself. Go kill a carru on the north road. The next traveler will like as not, not see a carru.
I think it might be silly to assume there are only 2 watering holes in the game world.
And there are still water vendors in the city.
When you can forage food, buy food, easily find water for free, or hunt twenty vultures that respawn before you make it back to the gates, you're not going to get anybody fighting over food and water. It's just not going to happen.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 06:16:56 PM
You can confirm it yourself. Go kill a carru on the north road. The next traveler will like as not, not see a carru.
You're being kind of pedantic here. That carru will respawn pretty reliably and with the zone refresh changes, there's an annoyingly good chance that the next traveler
will encounter a carru. The rate at which players hunt NPCs does not affect the volume or rate at which they respawn.
You can replace Heads of States with something maybe more appropriate (Congressmen? State officials?) and the point remains the same: it's a laughably petty activity for them to be engaging in. You're setting the bar for noble-driven conflict so low we might as well not have nobles. They'd just become an extension of spam-crafting indie merchants getting in to their tiffs. We should be wanting our sponsored roles to have the desire and ability to drive interesting plots that can involve large swathes of the player base, not spending all their time engaging in this kind of menial dickslapping.
QuoteI think it might be silly to assume there are only 2 watering holes in the game world.
Was just thinking about this, with mention of removal of watering holes.
Watering holes -do- need to be out in the wilderness. But they need to not be free water-spots for just any joe-blow who's out hunting. The only solution I could come up with was...HEY. MAKE RAIDING GROUPS AND FIGHT FOR WATERING HOLES.
Quote from: HavokBlue on May 18, 2015, 06:23:50 PM
I think it might be silly to assume there are only 2 watering holes in the game world.
And there are still water vendors in the city.
When you can forage food, buy food, easily find water for free, or hunt twenty vultures that respawn before you make it back to the gates, you're not going to get anybody fighting over food and water. It's just not going to happen.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 06:16:56 PM
You can confirm it yourself. Go kill a carru on the north road. The next traveler will like as not, not see a carru.
You're being kind of pedantic here. That carru will respawn pretty reliably and with the zone refresh changes, there's an annoyingly good chance that the next traveler will encounter a carru. The rate at which players hunt NPCs does not affect the volume or rate at which they respawn.
All I can say is that I've played in clans, where virtually our only meaningful duty, was occasionally going out and clearing hostile NPCs to make it safer for others to pass through. Mobs do spawn more quickly these days than they used to (Holy chalton, batman) but that service is not entirely lost. It's certainly not in the same realm as the truly abstract fantasy of food procurement.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 06:25:03 PM
You can replace Heads of States with something maybe more appropriate (Congressmen? State officials?) and the point remains the same: it's a laughably petty activity for them to be engaging in. You're setting the bar for noble-driven conflict so low we might as well not have nobles. They'd just become an extension of spam-crafting indie merchants getting in to their tiffs. We should be wanting our sponsored roles to have the desire and ability to drive interesting plots that can involve large swathes of the player base, not spending all their time engaging in this kind of menial dickslapping.
staff are bad and exist only to say no to your plots and they all get their jollies killing your PCs just before your plots culminate in something fun
true facts i promise
The pros and cons of having plots more complicated than "Let's go do this thing this afternoon and call it a day" are for another thread.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 06:25:03 PM
You can replace Heads of States with something maybe more appropriate (Congressmen? State officials?) and the point remains the same: it's a laughably petty activity for them to be engaging in. You're setting the bar for noble-driven conflict so low we might as well not have nobles. They'd just become an extension of spam-crafting indie merchants getting in to their tiffs. We should be wanting our sponsored roles to have the desire and ability to drive interesting plots that can involve large swathes of the player base, not spending all their time engaging in this kind of menial dickslapping.
I think it's about right for state officials, honesty. But I get what you're saying. Here's the deal:
1) I'm positive Synth was exaggerating, because realistically, it's unlikely to ever get that way without additional changes happening simultaneously that have nothing to do with free food, that also affect the game's economy.
2) If it did happen once or twice, the idea of a noble flippantly exerting some political influence on behalf of their aide, would be great and perfectly in character. Nobles do plenty more that is beneath them (or more accurately, often do nothing at all). Having a legitimate reason to slap some menial in the dick, once in a blue moon, would no doubt be entertaining.
But even though I can dream, I doubt the economy would ever get to such a great place, as nobles actually having to exert influence on behalf of their employees. Which by the way, is pretty much what nobles and public officials have done since time immemorial in RL to turn a profit.
I don't think securing their aide's moneymaking business against a competitor is beneath them, either. Especially since we're talking about PC nobles. PC nobles, with
precious few exceptions, are about as low on the totem pole as you can get, in terms of importance.
double post
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 06:16:56 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on May 18, 2015, 06:09:45 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 03:45:42 PM
Animals numbers don't actually rise and fall based on PC (in)actions
Technically, they do.
This is unfounded. It'd be interesting to see proof or have staff confirm this.
You can confirm it yourself. Go kill a carru on the north road. The next traveler will like as not, not see a carru.
But does this mean that the IC carru population is effected in any significant way that lasts longer than a RL hour, or even a day?
Quote from: Molten Heart on May 18, 2015, 06:33:01 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on May 18, 2015, 06:09:45 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 18, 2015, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on May 18, 2015, 03:45:42 PM
Animals numbers don't actually rise and fall based on PC (in)actions
Technically, they do.
This is unfounded. It'd be interesting to see proof or have staff confirm this.
You can confirm it yourself. Go kill a carru on the north road. The next traveler will like as not, not see a carru.
But does this mean that the IC carru population is effected in any significant way that lasts longer than a RL hour, or even a day?
[/quote]
At least it's something tangible. And again, I've had roles where doing so, every so often, was a needed service.
...Not saying its ideal. But it is something, and it has doing stuff involved, and not pretending to do it.
Quote from: Armaddict on May 18, 2015, 06:26:07 PM
QuoteI think it might be silly to assume there are only 2 watering holes in the game world.
Was just thinking about this, with mention of removal of watering holes.
Watering holes -do- need to be out in the wilderness. But they need to not be free water-spots for just any joe-blow who's out hunting. The only solution I could come up with was...HEY. MAKE RAIDING GROUPS AND FIGHT FOR WATERING HOLES.
People have poisoned watering holes in the past, too. Two of my grebbers have died that way.
Quote from: Cind on May 18, 2015, 08:52:15 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on May 18, 2015, 06:26:07 PM
QuoteI think it might be silly to assume there are only 2 watering holes in the game world.
Was just thinking about this, with mention of removal of watering holes.
Watering holes -do- need to be out in the wilderness. But they need to not be free water-spots for just any joe-blow who's out hunting. The only solution I could come up with was...HEY. MAKE RAIDING GROUPS AND FIGHT FOR WATERING HOLES.
People have poisoned watering holes in the past, too. Two of my grebbers have died that way.
Yup, protip always sip before you drink and always taste before you eat.
SOMEONE'S POISONED THE WATERING HOLE
i poisoned your aide's watering hole last night
zing
Quote from: MeTekillot on May 18, 2015, 09:02:53 PM
SOMEONE'S POISONED THE WATERING HOLE
I love when that happens.
Quote from: Delirium on May 18, 2015, 10:40:54 AM
Change how clan cooks work. Instead of being cooks they are quartermasters and oversee the kitchen stock and supplies.
If you give them an item of food, it is now available via 'list'. There is NO LIMIT to how many of each item you can give them.
There is no cost involved in buying the food, you get no money for giving them the food. They simply store it and catalog it.
The food will be stored exactly as-is, raw or cooked.
The food list will be subject to vNPC purchases, so it will gradually deplete over time, even if no PCs are using it.
PC cooks are now a viable role as you will want someone who can cook up the raw food and make meals.
>give root quartermaster
A kitchen quartermaster accepts a roasted reddish root and adds it to the stores.
>list
A kitchen quartermaster has the following food available:
1) A few roasted reddish roots
2) Many grilled pink slabs of meat
3) Some raw hunks of white meat
4) Several thin green tubers
>buy #2 quartermaster
A kitchen quartermaster gives you a grilled pink slab of meat.
Trust me, there will be enough food. "Back in the day", clan cooks were valuable because you got way less from skinning an animal. Hunting was far more dangerous and difficult. Clan cooks as they currently work are now essentially obsolete.
As for noble houses and other areas where it makes sense, their kitchens can be set to re-populate automatically with a "delivery" of food, removing the necessity of PC hunters or Aide busy-work as they no doubt have deals worked out with various supply sources.
During times of famine, those deliveries can be made less frequently, or be of lower volume, to reflect the harder times.
There is a hide vendor in Blackwing that works exactly like I have in mind, except this would be a no-money exchange.
You could actually extend this to having quartermasters for the clan halls too. For animal parts, raw materials, cloth, etc. A basic amount of whatever makes sense would always be available, but anything extra would be supplied by the PCs and used by PCs and vNPCs alike, the frequency based on how much virtual demand there currently is.
To note the "plot" concerns:
Merchant House storage rooms don't get filled up because people are bored and searching for meaning in their life. They get filled up because their players naturally want to work on their character's skills, and the only way to do that outside sparring is to hunt stuff, and it would be ridiculous to leave all that food out to rot in the desert in a supposedly resource-scarce world.
You can do skill-gain and survival-related activities and have a perfectly healthy plot-life, the two are not mutually exclusive.
I'm really with this idea.
I really like when clans don't have an auto-cook. Getting water is more of a bland chore. Not giving free water gives you the excuse to spend all that coin on booze instead of water, so that's cool. Imagine being forced to only drink ale at the lightest. That'd be awesome.
The Byn would be screwed to high heaven, but the GMHs would be fine as long as they had a good hunter to everyone else ratio.
I've been pushing for a while to make House hunters more useful on a meaningful level. I thought about it and realized I've been fighting the wrong battle. In reality, House hunters SHOULD feel like what they are accomplishing really doesn't matter....because it doesn't.
As a GMH hunter, you are one of hundreds upon hundreds of hunters all hunting the same things and providing those same things to the House. As a character, you KNOW what you are bringing in really doesn't matter a great deal which is why things like salaries aren't really that good usually, and the perks are kind of "meh" as well. (Covered in lots of other threads. No need to go back into that.)
A GMH hunter is someone who shows up, gets free water, free food, a bunk to sleep on and a footlocker, but in reality, you are the same dusty smelly hunter as the other several hundred who are just like you doing the exact same things.
This is why it doesn't matter if you bring in materials, or food, in terms of making the House successful. Does it matter in terms of you not getting fired if your PC boss discovers you are being lazy? Absolutely. Does it matter in terms of helping or hurting Salarr or Kadius? Not in the least. To the upper ranks of Salarr and Kadius, you are just hunter number 346 that is probably going to die soon. You are field fodder, just like all of the other field fodder.
So, as a House hunter what really is your goal? It isn't hunting. Hunting isn't going to get you anywhere because the House has hundreds of other hunters who are just as good at it if not better than you. All of that bahamet and horror shell is coming from somewhere for those orders that are being filled for bahamet and horror armor, and usually, that isn't being harvested by PC's. I don't just mean PC sales either. There must be hundreds of sets of that armor going out constantly to NPC's and VNPC's. This is what keeps Salarr's wheels turning. The fact your PC hunter exists, as far as hunting goes, is a footnote at best to the system and in reality, it probably doesn't even qualify as a footnote.
The more I think about it, I've been fighting the wrong fight. Making what your hunter does as far as hunting goes matter to the House is a ridiculous and pretty unrealistic goal. House hunters shouldn't be important to the House. What they do in terms of hunting shouldn't matter. If it did, that would mean Salarr and Kadius are so incredibly fragile that a single hunter out of hundreds actually has a way through hunting to affect their economies and monopolies.....and they don't. If they did it would be silly.
The goal of House hunters in terms of "measurable achievements" is almost required to be based on things not related to hunting in order to show their true value to the House through other means and accomplishments. That is the only way they can or should ever get noticed....hunting is just sort of the secondary focus, since IC'ly it isn't really needed, and OOC'ly the players of those hunters know it isn't needed (compounded infinitely more by the new NPC's going in for instant orders for all House crafts with no materials required).
In short, I've been complaining that House hunters aren't useful as hunters for a while and it bothered me, but that was because I was looking at it the wrong way. House hunters shouldn't be focused on hunting, if they want to be truly successful, they should be focusing on politics and finding a way to be useful outside of hunting...since that is the only way they are going to really shine.
Just tie the food/water thing in with clan caps.
Suppose Nenyuk were open, and staff determined Nenyuk's ideal amount of players were 8. Nenyuk will now have its vendors hand out free food/water to the first 8 people to join up, but nothing for anyone who joins after that.
So, a sergeant/noble/whomever gets to hire people just fine. They'll just need to make sure they won't starve after a certain point.
Yes and no, Dman.
In my head, I see hunters materials going into a Crew bin, with surplus bagged up.
When their boss comes up for a "performance review", the functioning of their crew,would be part of it.
Have I missed something in your Internet inflexion ???
Quote from: bracken on May 19, 2015, 02:41:12 PM
Yes and no, Dman.
In my head, I see hunters materials going into a Crew bin, with surplus bagged up.
When their boss comes up for a "performance review", the functioning of their crew,would be part of it.
Have I missed something in your Internet inflexion ???
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Quote from: Desertman on May 19, 2015, 10:32:47 AM
House hunters shouldn't be focused on hunting, if they want to be truly successful, they should be focusing on politics and finding a way to be useful outside of hunting...since that is the only way they are going to really shine.
I'd rather shine as a hunter, honestly. Your whole post was sort've depressing in a Tulukian sort've way. Not every role needs to be concerned with politics. Some just want to play a survival RPI, hunt animals, butcher them, cook food, have people actually need the food in a game where hunger depletion is a thing.
If stuff stays this automated, they might as well turn off hunger and thirst, cause having it only punishes newbies who can't get into a clan.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 19, 2015, 03:09:30 PM
Quote from: Desertman on May 19, 2015, 10:32:47 AM
House hunters shouldn't be focused on hunting, if they want to be truly successful, they should be focusing on politics and finding a way to be useful outside of hunting...since that is the only way they are going to really shine.
I'd rather shine as a hunter, honestly. Your whole post was sort've depressing in a Tulukian sort've way. Not every role needs to be concerned with politics. Some just want to play a survival RPI, hunt animals, butcher them, cook food, have people actually need the food in a game where hunger depletion is a thing.
If stuff stays this automated, they might as well turn off hunger and thirst, cause having it only punishes newbies who can't get into a clan.
I don't disagree with anything you have said. I would prefer that system as well myself. What my post is outlining is why that system doesn't, and probably can't exist, in terms of playing a GMH hunter.
(There are avenues in game however that allow you to play exactly the type of hunter you want to play. That avenue just isn't GMH's.)
If the House NEEDED anything your hunter brought in, it would mean the House was fragile enough, and its monopoly was fragile enough, that what a single hunter did mattered.
What your hunter does doesn't matter. It can't.
The orders will still get filled, the employees will still eat, and the House will still exist, if your hunter never brings in anything.
Will your hunter maybe get fired? Almost certainly. Will that matter to the House? No.
If you want to shine as a hunter, you better be doing something that isn't being accomplished by dozens of virtual hunters every day, or by any other reasonably-skilled PC. Without touching on politics: Hunt dangerous game, rare game, find rare plants or explore. Bring news and interesting new items back to your employers. Don't expect to get a pat on the head for bringing back your 9000th scrab steak.
This is why the best hunters also happen to be the guy you go to to poison your blades, or the person you go to to scout out a new area, or the person you go to to kill something from a range, or the person you go to when you've got a bleeding wound that needs binded, or the person you go to to cure a poison.
You guys are trying to divorce the IC job from the OOC usefulness of a ranger(or of another classes specialization, using ranger for this instance). The reality is Armageddon is a game that's meant to function a very specific way, with classes that are as important to their IC roles as their job of killing animals is. You'll never have "just a hunter." when you hire a hunter. You get so, so much more.
My experience, while limited, is that to succeed as a GMH hunter is to play like being part of that crew matters. Going out and getting the job done is part, but coming back with everyone after getting the job done is better. Taking an interest in the house's interests. Looking out for people. (Or plotting to get rid of them if they can't belong, that's legit too.) One skin more or less doesn't matter, but the idea that you show up and do your job does. While it's true that to the organization you're just a hunter out of many, in your unit what you do and don't do is important. And for that reason, using something like Delirium's suggestion or getting rid of cooks, or anything that makes that contribution more quantifiable is important.
Oocly it's all one and zeros right? But while you play your role, it should feel meaningful. Crates of crap no one wants doesn't feel meaningful.
Quote from: Barzalene on May 19, 2015, 03:47:01 PM
My experience, while limited, is that to succeed as a GMH hunter is to play like being part of that crew matters. Going out and getting the job done is part, but coming back with everyone after getting the job done is better. Taking an interest in the house's interests. Looking out for people. (Or plotting to get rid of them if they can't belong, that's legit too.) One skin more or less doesn't matter, but the idea that you show up and do your job does. While it's true that to the organization you're just a hunter out of many, in your unit what you do and don't do is important. And for that reason, using something like Delirium's suggestion or getting rid of cooks, or anything that makes that contribution more quantifiable is important.
Oocly it's all one and zeros right? But while you play your role, it should feel meaningful. Crates of crap no one wants doesn't feel meaningful.
The only way to feel like it is meaningful as the player is if it truly is meaningful.
The only what for it to be meaningful is if the goods brought in really are needed to produce the final IC products and orders, otherwise the orders don't get filled.
If the products still get produced and orders still get filled if you hunt or not, then what you are doing as a hunter isn't meaningful. It is a flavor role. You are there to "provide the appearance" of meaning, without actually having any meaning that matters. (In terms of hunting and gathering.)
If I know OOC that this is the truth, no matter how much I roleplay and pretend it matters, as the player behind the keyboard, it doesn't feel meaningful to me.
It doesn't matter if the crates are full or empty. Either way, I'm still just giving the appearance of a meaningful purpose without there actually being one. (In terms of hunting and gathering.)
Some of it is. Not all. Some of the stuff it doesn't matter if you get it. Other stuff is required to make items. Now maybe the new quartermasters change that. And maybe that's something to be reassessed. Things that you had to make before quartermasters went in, maybe should be taken out of their inventory. (I don't know what is or isn't loaded.) I know in the past there were things the imms would load for me to use as a model, but subsequent instances had to be made from acquired materials as a general rule.
Quote from: Barzalene on May 19, 2015, 04:05:16 PM
Some of it is. Not all. Some of the stuff it doesn't matter if you get it. Other stuff is required to make items. Now maybe the new quartermasters change that. And maybe that's something to be reassessed. Things that you had to make before quartermasters went in, maybe should be taken out of their inventory. (I don't know what is or isn't loaded.) I know in the past there were things the imms would load for me to use as a model, but subsequent instances had to be made from acquired materials as a general rule.
Yeah, I proposed this idea. (Having only those items that can't be crafted loaded on the quartermaster.)
It was confirmed the quartermaster will have them available if they can be crafted or not.
But the system is new. And there's been other stuff going on. They may look at that decision down the road. Or not.
Quote from: Desertman on May 19, 2015, 04:06:47 PM
Yeah, I proposed this idea. (Having only those items that can't be crafted loaded on the quartermaster.)
It was confirmed the quartermaster will have them available if they can be crafted or not.
To clarify: I'm pretty sure these NPCs will not be
quartermasters. They will be
shopkeepers (which is what the current NPCs for GMHs are). Different type of code thing. They operate completely differently.
I know that there's still discussion staff-side about how to put craftable items on these NPCs. I'm not sure there is a conclusion yet, because there are balance issues. On the one hand, crafting stuff for the clan should be meaningful; on the other hand, what do you do when you have no one who can craft a thing, but Lord McFluffypants wants it NOW NOW NOW? And also, how do crafters learn to make stuff when they can't find an example thing to analyze?
We are working within the limitations of current code, but our staff is pretty creative and I feel sure they will come up with the best solution possible while also balancing different requirements.
My personal recommendation based off of my own play style and preferences.
A) Shopkeeper NPC has all items on them that are House clan items. (Craftable and non-craftable.)
B) No items that can be crafted can be sold off of the shopkeeper.
C) The shopkeeper is only there to provide a list of clan items.
D) If your clan leader hasn't been able to keep a good crafter on staff, your clan leader now has the uncomfortable responsibility of explaining to Lord McFluffypants why he can't get his order....because as a leader you can't keep good staff members.
E) If it is craftable, now you can tell your hunters exactly what is needed for this order. (This gives them and your crafter meaningful purpose.)
F) If it isn't craftable, you are allowed to sell it off of the shopkeeper to Lord McFluffypants. (As a clan leader you may even have to be persuasive and maybe talk Lord McFluffypants into an alternative order you CAN give him from "The other House crafters.")
This is a very "hardline" policy. I would enjoy it personally. I enjoy being given the opportunity to fail. I enjoy being given the opportunity to succeed in a meaningful way.
I like the idea of clan leaders being responsible for actually leading and having to face IC consequences (the disfavor or Lord McFluffypants for one) for not being good leaders. If you can't keep a good crafter on staff because nobody wants to follow you....you need to change your policies, or get ready to face a lot of consequences.
If you are a great clan leader and you are able to keep a great staff producing for your customers you are going to be loved by just about everyone and I wouldn't be surprised if staff stepped in to show you some favor too for doing such a great job on the IC front by giving you IC rewards.
That is my perfect system. (It is absolutely something a lot of people will hate. I understand that.)
It's really quite simple. This game, functionally, has only one economy. The economy of hunger. Everyone must eat. Everyone must drink.
That is the engine of the survival RPI. Food and water. Hunger and thirst.
The economy is out of whack, because the primary economy of the game - starvation - is completely eliminated at the moment. You are only affected by hunger and thirst if A) you are a newbie or B) you go out of your way to risk it.
Everyone else has no hunger or thirst issues. They might as well have it turned off. You don't even need a waterskin. I never carry one. I just need to drink whenever I pass through the barracks.
That's the crux of the argument. If people are really happy with the current situation, then I'd suggest they'd be even happier on a MUSH, and not an RPI MUD.
It didn't used to be this way. It got this way because there were dozens more clans than could be supported, and lots of tiny ones, like Tuluki noble houses. Those are gone. It should go back to the way it was. Militia/Byn/Other Qualifying Clan can keep their iconic foods. Nobles keep their water. The rest of us should start playing the game again.
Quote from: Desertman on May 19, 2015, 04:38:08 PM
My personal recommendation based off of my own play style and preferences.
A) Shopkeeper NPC has all items on them that are House clan items. (Craftable and non-craftable.)
B) No items that can be crafted can be sold off of the shopkeeper.
C) The shopkeeper is only there to provide a list of clan items.
D) If your clan leader hasn't been able to keep a good crafter on staff, your clan leader now has the uncomfortable responsibility of explaining to Lord McFluffypants why he can't get his order....because as a leader you can't keep good staff members.
E) If it is craftable, now you can tell your hunters exactly what is needed for this order. (This gives them and your crafter meaningful purpose.)
F) If it isn't craftable, you are allowed to sell it off of the shopkeeper to Lord McFluffypants. (As a clean leader you may even have to be persuasive and maybe talk Lord McFluffypants into an alternative order you CAN give him from "The other House crafters.")
This is a very "hardline" policy. I would enjoy it personally. I enjoy being given the opportunity to fail. I enjoy being given the opportunity to succeed in a meaningful way.
I like the idea of clan leaders being responsible for actually leading and having to face IC consequences (the disfavor or Lord McFluffypants for one) for not being good leaders. If you can't keep a good crafter on staff because nobody wants to follow you....you need to change your policies, or get ready to face a lot of consequences.
If you are a great clan leader and you are able to keep a great staff producing for your customers you are going to be loved by just about everyone and I wouldn't be surprised if staff stepped in to show you some favor too for doing such a great job on the IC front by giving you IC rewards.
That is my perfect system. (It is absolutely something a lot of people will hate. I understand that.)
See, this, I agree with and would love. The idea to remove clan cooks to make hunters more relevant misses the problem if the problem is that they are supposed to be gathering materials to craft, not hunting just to keep the clan afloat when the clan is many times richer than a noble house. Forcing people to actually use their hunters for what they are supposed to be used for is the most direct way to address the problem, and the one that would make IC reality line up best with documentation. Trying to alter the role of a GMH hunter to something that it is, per the documentation, not supposed to be, makes no sense as a solution, because it doesn't fix the problem, it just changes it to a different problem.
When did this become Hunger Games MUD?
Some of you are blowing the whole "THIS GAME IS ALL ABOUT FOOD!" idea way out of proportion. That's not Armageddon and it never has been.
Must....resist..."Eat a dick" joke...
I see the logic. I think it looks better on paper. It's great for hunters and minions. It sucks when you're a leader and you're in a constant shit storm and on top of it, everytime you log in you're beseiged by people who mistake you for a gumball machine and think if they just kick you hard enough they can have their crap. Now, yes, maybe if I were a better leader that wouldn't be a problem. But I'm not. If we reserve these roles for only the best leaders who can always keep a full crew there will be longer lapses when there are no leaders at all.
I think the answer lays between Dman's outline above and having full crates and shopkeepers who will give you every thing ever the minute you need it.
Some ideas are that you don't offer what you cannot provide. Or that you try to beg your imms to help you out when someone poisons the water tun and all your crafters die. But I think the sweet spot is something between this and that.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on May 19, 2015, 04:50:59 PM
When did this become Hunger Games MUD?
Some of you are blowing the whole "THIS GAME IS ALL ABOUT FOOD!" idea way out of proportion. That's not Armageddon and it never has been.
Everyone has to eat. Everyone has to drink. That makes it fundamentally and thematically a survival RPI. Anyone that has any knowledge of game design, knows that basic mechanics like these are never peripheral. They are there specifically to create a struggle.
Something is fundamentally wrong when the only people that have to be concerned about it are the hopelessly newbish and vets who deliberately seek out the challenge.For everyone else, it's a chore without meaning.
Lays or lies?
Quote from: Barzalene on May 19, 2015, 04:53:42 PM
I see the logic. I think it looks better on paper. It's great for hunters and minions. It sucks when you're a leader and you're in a constant shit storm and on top of it, everytime you log in you're beseiged by people who mistake you for a gumball machine and think if they just kick you hard enough they can have their crap.
I think it'll help leaders. Often the biggest problem is keeping minions busy in a meaningful fashion. So what helps minions and hunters, in turn, helps leaders and takes more stress off them.
Although there has definitely been a trend in the game with leaders (even down to Corporals and such) getting wrapped up more with high politics and intrigue hijinks, and less to do with their basic roles (for which there is admittedly, virtually no need beyond the occasional escort).
Quote from: Barzalene on May 19, 2015, 04:53:42 PM
I see the logic. I think it looks better on paper. It's great for hunters and minions. It sucks when you're a leader and you're in a constant shit storm and on top of it, everytime you log in you're beseiged by people who mistake you for a gumball machine and think if they just kick you hard enough they can have their crap. Now, yes, maybe if I were a better leader that wouldn't be a problem. But I'm not. If we reserve these roles for only the best leaders who can always keep a full crew there will be longer lapses when there are no leaders at all.
I think the answer lays between Dman's outline above and having full crates and shopkeepers who will give you every thing ever the minute you need it.
Some ideas are that you don't offer what you cannot provide. Or that you try to beg your imms to help you out when someone poisons the water tun and all your crafters die. But I think the sweet spot is something between this and that.
I agree my recommended system will absolutely shit on some people and probably wouldn't be optimal for the game as a whole. I'm just saying, I would enjoy it personally.
Part of me wants to say, "If you are a leader, you should be the type of person who can and does play a good leader, or you deserve to suffer until you get better, or you leave and let a good leader step in.". (Some people might even enjoy being the bad leader. I can see that being fun too.)
The other part of me says, "Cool your tits Desertman, this is a game son. Relax because you are going overboard.".
Both of those voices have some merit I think, but I think you are right, something in the middle is the best final solution.
Edited to Add: And it appears staff is trying to find that best middle ground.
I think even good leaders struggle with crew building. And even when you have the perfect crew it doesn't last. People die. People take sponsored roles or rage quit or lose interest in the game. And then you have to find replacements. Some days you don't have enough lockers and you have to turn them away. Other days you just can't find anyone to play with you. And that's for good leaders. Or at least that's me. And I agree you have to want to be a great leader or otherwise you should just go home. But it's not always easy. And I'm not always successful. I think that's across the board.
Quote from: Barzalene on May 19, 2015, 05:00:47 PM
I think even good leaders struggle with crew building. And even when you have the perfect crew it doesn't last. People die. People take sponsored roles or rage quit or lose interest in the game. And then you have to find replacements. Some days you don't have enough lockers and you have to turn them away. Other days you just can't find anyone to play with you. And that's for good leaders. Or at least that's me. And I agree you have to want to be a great leader or otherwise you should just go home. But it's not always easy. And I'm not always successful. I think that's across the board.
This is when you get to experience the part of the system that isn't sunshine and rainbows, and I think that is fine. If there isn't some real darkness waiting for you if you fail, you can't appreciate the light when you succeed.
In a system where everything is just auto-loaded there is no light, and there is no darkness. It doesn't really matter what you do.
Alright, I'll buy that.
Quote from: Barzalene on May 19, 2015, 05:04:30 PM
Alright, I'll buy that.
Now I just wish I was smart enough to think of that good middle ground system...which I'm probably not.
I will do some serious thinking on it and come back though.
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 19, 2015, 04:54:11 PMEveryone has to eat. Everyone has to drink. That makes it fundamentally and thematically a survival RPI.
Everyone also wears clothing and/or armor. Does that make the game fundamentally and thematically a fashion and gear RPI?
QuoteAnyone that has any knowledge of game design, knows that basic mechanics like these are never peripheral. They are there specifically to create a struggle.
I have knowledge of game design and do not know that as a fact.
QuoteSomething is fundamentally wrong when the only people that have to be concerned about it are the hopelessly newbish and vets who deliberately seek out the challenge.
And anyone not in a clan... and hunters out hunting... and soldiers on patrol... and mercenaries on contract...
QuoteFor everyone else, it's a chore without meaning.
It's only a chore if you treat it as such. It can also be a roleplaying prop and a system to add structure to your PC's daily life.
You want to suggest changes to specific clans, fine, but trying to back up your arguments with gross misrepresentations about the nature of Armageddon or "game design" is pretty silly in my opinion.
Quote from: Barzalene on May 19, 2015, 05:00:47 PM
I think even good leaders struggle with crew building. And even when you have the perfect crew it doesn't last. People die. People take sponsored roles or rage quit or lose interest in the game. And then you have to find replacements. Some days you don't have enough lockers and you have to turn them away. Other days you just can't find anyone to play with you. And that's for good leaders. Or at least that's me. And I agree you have to want to be a great leader or otherwise you should just go home. But it's not always easy. And I'm not always successful. I think that's across the board.
You're absolutely right, and this is partially why I'm so optimistic about the current state of the game. It was a great choice to pare away a lot of the dead weight. I would have liked to see a couple tribes remain.
Without the Legion, Tuluki noble houses, Tuluki Templarate, Northern distaff branches of every major Southern clan, etc, things are a lot more cohesive. When I played, the Northern and Southern branches of various clans were basically distinct organizations, and both suffered for it. You had to double up on leadership.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on May 19, 2015, 05:07:37 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on May 19, 2015, 04:54:11 PMEveryone has to eat. Everyone has to drink. That makes it fundamentally and thematically a survival RPI.
Everyone also wears clothing and/or armor. Does that make the game fundamentally and thematically a fashion and gear RPI?
QuoteAnyone that has any knowledge of game design, knows that basic mechanics like these are never peripheral. They are there specifically to create a struggle.
I have knowledge of game design and do not know that as a fact.
QuoteSomething is fundamentally wrong when the only people that have to be concerned about it are the hopelessly newbish and vets who deliberately seek out the challenge.
And anyone not in a clan... and hunters out hunting... and soldiers on patrol... and mercenaries on contract...
QuoteFor everyone else, it's a chore without meaning.
It's only a chore if you treat it as such. It can also be a roleplaying prop and a system to add structure to your PC's daily life.
You want to suggest changes to specific clans, fine, but trying to back up your arguments with gross misrepresentations about the nature of Armageddon or "game design" is pretty silly in my opinion.
I wouldn't want to play a game that you designed, if you included hunger and food, and it served no purpose except to confuse newbies.
And again. You get more into MUSH style terminology. Hunger and thirst as no utility except to fulfill an RP prop. This is still a MUD. It should be more than RP prop (which it is, but only for newbs and those who arbitrarily risk themselves).
I'd like this game to have an actual economy. Games should have an economy. Food and water are the only resources that all characters must consume. That makes food and water a fundamental component of any potential game economy. (How do you not recognize this?)
If you can't wrap your head around this, or are still talking in terms of RP props, then we have no need to continue conversing. Because if staff really envisions food and water as RP props, then they ought just turn off hunger/thirst.
I think you're the one that is more likely to be making a gross misrepresentation of Armageddon, based on a very specific subset of its player culture, than what the
game actually advertises itself as.
I think there needs to be some sort of serious negative you take IC'ly for selling items off of the shopkeeper NPC in the backroom.
There needs to be some sort of measurable and meaningful negative associated with going that route so that players are naturally pushed towards marketing items they have crafted themselves.
If there is no negative to selling directly off of the shopkeeper NPC instead of using your hunters and crafters...there should at least be no/minimal gain to doing it. (Much less gain than if you DID use PC hunters and crafters.)
How about this system?
1) You don't have a crafter or hunters available to make Lord McFluffypants his diamond greatsword.
2) You go to the NPC shopkeeper and buy a diamond greatsword off of him for 18,000 coins.
3) You deliver the diamond greatsword to Lord Mcfluffypants.
4) You deposit 18,000 coins back into your personal account.
(The rule is you HAVE to charge the client what the NPC shopkeeper charged you. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PROFIT OFF OF USING THE NPC SHOPKEEPER TO FILL ORDERS!!!)
With this system you do not make any profit off of using the shopkeeper NPC to fill orders.
You can still fill the orders. You can still bypass hassling staff to load the items. You can still bypass having to deal with Lord McFluffypants hassling you constantly like a vending machine.
What you can't do is profit from going the easy route.
YOUR crew did not craft this item. YOUR crew did not pull in the materials.
All you did was deliver the item to the client on behalf of House Salarr for another (VNPC) crew.
The only profit you stand to make is if Lord Mcfluffypants decides to tip you (which is fine in my opinion). Your other profit is also that you just made Lord Mcfluffypants happy with you, so you made a good political contact.
Now, if you DO have good hunters and crafters in your staff because you are doing well as a leader and Lord Mcfluffypants DOES buy a diamond greatsword from you that YOUR crew did craft....you get all of the normal profits and everyone is happy.
That seems like a pretty good incentive system to me.
All of the negatives regarding staff being hassled are gone. All of the negatives regarding not being able to fill orders quickly is gone.
You have a measurable positive for using PC crafters and hunters to fill orders. (Actual IC profit.)
referenced post got moderated. I'll try to behave too.
I just don't want this thread locked. I think my last idea was a dang good idea. :(
Quote from: Desertman on May 19, 2015, 05:13:57 PM
I think there needs to be some sort of serious negative you take IC'ly for selling items off of the shopkeeper NPC in the backroom.
There needs to be some sort of measurable and meaningful negative associated with going that route so that players are naturally pushed towards marketing items they have crafted themselves.
If there is no negative to selling directly off of the shopkeeper NPC instead of using your hunters and crafters...there should at least be no/minimal gain to doing it. (Much less gain than if you DID use PC hunters and crafters.)
How about this system?
1) You don't have a crafter or hunters available to make Lord McFluffypants his diamond greatsword.
2) You go to the NPC shopkeeper and buy a diamond greatsword off of him for 18,000 coins.
3) You deliver the diamond greatsword to Lord Mcfluffypants.
4) You deposit 18,000 coins back into your personal account.
With this system you do not make any profit off of using the shopkeeper NPC to fill orders.
You can still fill the orders. You can still bypass hassling staff to load the items. You can still bypass having to deal with Lord McFluffypants hassling you constantly like a vending machine.
What you can't do is profit from going the easy route.
YOUR crew did not craft this item. YOUR crew did not pull in the materials.
All you did was deliver the item to the client on behalf of House Salarr for another (VNPC) crew.
The only profit you stand to make is if Lord Mcfluffypants decides to tip you. Your other profit is also that you just made Lord Mcfluffypants happy with you, so you made a good political contact.
Now, if you DO have good hunters and crafters in your staff because you are doing well as a leader and Lord Mcfluffypants DOES buy a diamond greatsword from you that YOUR crew did craft....you get all of the normal profits and everyone is happy.
That seems like a pretty good incentive system to me.
All of the negatives regarding staff being hassled are gone. All of the negatives regarding not being able to fill orders quickly is gone.
You have a measurable positive for using PC crafters and hunters to fill orders. (Actual IC profit.)
Eh, technically the production cost to your GMH is more or less the same, whether the item is loaded on an NPC or whether "your crew" got the loot.
I don't see why the GMH upper-level management would let you keep more of the profit for yourself, just because "your crew" got the shit, as opposed to a vNPC crew, unless "your crew" is some sort of crack-squad of hunters that is uniquely capable of grebbing otherwise impossible-to-find items. And if that's the case, the item produced from said impossible-to-find items shouldn't simply be loaded into an NPC shopkeeper's inventory in the first place.
Clans should give free and unlimited food only to those members of their clans that are entirely wrapped up in plots that keep them from realistically taking care of their characters basic needs (food/water). Leave those jobs (cooking/hunting/growing food) for the npcs/vnpcs and the PCs can spend their time taking care of the fun business.
Who wants to do all the maintenance work if there's cool stuff happening?
Nope, we're not doing a flame war guys. Sorry.
I've moderated some posts for this thread. Please keep it civil.
Quote from: Synthesis on May 19, 2015, 05:21:31 PM
Quote from: Desertman on May 19, 2015, 05:13:57 PM
I think there needs to be some sort of serious negative you take IC'ly for selling items off of the shopkeeper NPC in the backroom.
There needs to be some sort of measurable and meaningful negative associated with going that route so that players are naturally pushed towards marketing items they have crafted themselves.
If there is no negative to selling directly off of the shopkeeper NPC instead of using your hunters and crafters...there should at least be no/minimal gain to doing it. (Much less gain than if you DID use PC hunters and crafters.)
How about this system?
1) You don't have a crafter or hunters available to make Lord McFluffypants his diamond greatsword.
2) You go to the NPC shopkeeper and buy a diamond greatsword off of him for 18,000 coins.
3) You deliver the diamond greatsword to Lord Mcfluffypants.
4) You deposit 18,000 coins back into your personal account.
With this system you do not make any profit off of using the shopkeeper NPC to fill orders.
You can still fill the orders. You can still bypass hassling staff to load the items. You can still bypass having to deal with Lord McFluffypants hassling you constantly like a vending machine.
What you can't do is profit from going the easy route.
YOUR crew did not craft this item. YOUR crew did not pull in the materials.
All you did was deliver the item to the client on behalf of House Salarr for another (VNPC) crew.
The only profit you stand to make is if Lord Mcfluffypants decides to tip you. Your other profit is also that you just made Lord Mcfluffypants happy with you, so you made a good political contact.
Now, if you DO have good hunters and crafters in your staff because you are doing well as a leader and Lord Mcfluffypants DOES buy a diamond greatsword from you that YOUR crew did craft....you get all of the normal profits and everyone is happy.
That seems like a pretty good incentive system to me.
All of the negatives regarding staff being hassled are gone. All of the negatives regarding not being able to fill orders quickly is gone.
You have a measurable positive for using PC crafters and hunters to fill orders. (Actual IC profit.)
Eh, technically the production cost to your GMH is more or less the same, whether the item is loaded on an NPC or whether "your crew" got the loot.
I don't see why the GMH upper-level management would let you keep more of the profit for yourself, just because "your crew" got the shit, as opposed to a vNPC crew, unless "your crew" is some sort of crack-squad of hunters that is uniquely capable of grebbing otherwise impossible-to-find items. And if that's the case, the item produced from said impossible-to-find items shouldn't simply be loaded into an NPC shopkeeper's inventory in the first place.
You don't keep more of the profit. You keep the same profit you would keep with the current system.
The only change here is you don't keep ANY profit for using the NPC shopkeeper.
Seems to be mostly circular arguments here now so I'll go ahead and lock this.
Recap 1: We could make some changes to how cooks work. No, it is not that easy. Starting out a sentence with "why not just" does not make it easy. It's not a bad idea, it just isn't something that is a priority or something that can be done easily.
Recap 2: We do still trust players to appropriately handle the proposed NPC merchants with stuff on them as we mentioned earlier when we said we were going to implement it.