Ways Points of Conflict and the Burden of Being on Staff Can be Reduced?

[jalden]

I do think that one of the problems with this community is that such a high degree of staff oversight is currently required. This results in a lot of potential places where conflict could arise, and it also seems like it is stressful for staff. These are some ideas for reducing both the workload and potential points of conflict.

1. Automate receiving Karma based on playtime. I think that there was a point in time when Armageddon's Karma system made sense. This game was created in 1991. Even into the early 2000s, there were not a lot of good options for playing free MMORPGS. While many Armageddon players were jumping on to roleplay, other players really just wanted to be playing WOW. That is no longer the case. There are a huge number of well-made, free, multiplayer, hack-and-slash RPGs out there. Anyone trying to play Armageddon in the 2020s wants to roleplay. Because of this, I think that more can be expected from players and less oversight is needed.

2. Make players responsible for enforcing roleplay. Karma reductions should be player driven, and this should be an expected part of participating in the community. If someone is using OOC inappropriately, players should submit a complaint to Staff. Then per Staff guidelines, action should be taken. The first time a warning should be given. The second time, Karma should be temporarily be reduced. Very clear standards and guidelines would be needed for this to work (ex: not submitting a complaint because someone killed your character).

3. Make players responsible for accepting new character applications. Urban Dictionary has a system where users must review multiple submissions before making their own submission. Player descriptions and background could be separated. When creating a character, players could be required to review descriptions and backgrounds for grammar, typos, and for being in theme with the game world. It would take a lot of work to implement this, but I think this would take a lot of pressure off staff.

[Tailong]

Players cannot even get along in Discord or the forums, and can't even log into the game currently, but you want them to be in control of karma, roleplay, and character applications?

At this point, the burden is with players, not staff.

[Maziel]

Players cannot even get along in Discord or the forums, and can't even log into the game currently, but you want them to be in control of karma, roleplay, and character applications?

At this point, the burden is with players, not staff.

• Anyone who's been in the military knows that adversity, that is solving problems together, can bring anyone together. Not solving problems together and not being able to solve problems together is circular. Where you see a problem, I see an opportunity.
  
• Expecting either staff or players not to have any life to fulfill whatever is terrible. Both players and staff should be able to have a work/life balance. Happier and healthier staff effects players, and vice versa
• There (ideally) are far more players than staff
• Folks get along pretty well in the Arm discord Pooch has. Could ask him to take a look at the one you frequent and see if he has any input. Or just direct them to his for the simplest approach. Pooch probably wouldn't appreciate this, but I doubt he'd say no.

It's basically blockchain. We each verify the integrity of the others, and build together through consensus.

If you don't think the average Arm player is fun to play with, intelligent, and/or has valuable insight, then I'm not sure why you'd bother even playing.

"I think the best way to develop a game world is by letting the players influence it as much as possible"
#Delerak 2023

[DesertT]

I do think that one of the problems with this community is that such a high degree of staff oversight is required. This results in a lot of potential paces where conflict could arise, and it also seems like it is stressful for staff. These are some ideas for reducing both the workload and potential points of conflict.

1. Automate receiving Karma based on playtime. I think that there was a point in time when Armageddon's Karma system made sense. This game was created in 1991. Even into the early 2000s, there were not a lot of good options for playing free MMORPGS. While many Armageddon players were jumping on to roleplay, other players really just wanted to be playing WOW. That is no longer the case. There are a huge number of well-made, free, multiplayer, hack-and-slash RPGs out there. Anyone trying to play Armageddon 2020s wants to roleplay. Because of this, I think that more can be expected from players and less oversight is needed.

2. Make players responsible for enforcing roleplay. Karma reductions should be player driven, and this should be an expected part of participating in the community. If someone is using OOC inappropriately, players should submit a complaint to Staff. Then per Staff guidelines, action should be taken. The first time a warning should be given. The second time, Karma should be temporarily be reduced. Very clear standards and guidelines would be needed for this to work (ex: not submitting a complaint because someone killed your character).

3. Make players responsible for accepting new character applications. Urban Dictionary has a system where users must review multiple submissions before making their own submission. Player descriptions and background could be separated. When creating a character, players could be required to review descriptions and backgrounds for grammar, typos, and for being in theme with the game world. It would take a lot of work to implement this, but I think this would take a lot of pressure off staff.

1.  I can agree with your first point but only up to their 1st karma.  After that, I do feel it should be earned.

2.  I think this is close to how it is already?  But maybe having hard and fast "first" and "second" mandatory punishments is a bit much.

3.  I'd be open to opening character applications up to GDB and Discord mods if that's possible.

I think the GDB/Discord player-moderators has been a GREAT Addition and will help with the staff overload as you pointed out.

To Maziel's point, depends on which military branch you join.  If you join a small State's National Guard, the politics is horrendous.  And Arm is 10-15% of a small State's National Guard.  So I don't know that I can agree with your stance.  Sorry.

[Maziel]

To Maziel's point, depends on which military branch you join.  If you join a small State's National Guard, the politics is horrendous.  And Arm is 10-15% of a small State's National Guard.  So I don't know that I can agree with your stance.  Sorry.

I may eat this, and it may be considered gatekeeping, but if 'embrace the suck' isn't something you do as a team often (solving problems under duress together with a hodgepodge of weirdos), then I don't consider it to be the same thing.

[Malken]

Is there anyone sane left in control of this complete clown show?

[DesertT]

To Maziel's point, depends on which military branch you join.  If you join a small State's National Guard, the politics is horrendous.  And Arm is 10-15% of a small State's National Guard.  So I don't know that I can agree with your stance.  Sorry.

I may eat this, and it may be considered gatekeeping, but if 'embrace the suck' isn't something you do as a team often (solving problems under duress together with a hodgepodge of weirdos), then I don't consider it to be the same thing.

Brother, I just got back last year from the fifth hottest country in the world solving problems with international partners with no budget. 

Maybe I can say it better this way:  At this point, the Commander (just one person) needs to make a decision based off of ALL of the staff-puke input they have received and drive us forward.  Consensus be damned!!   

[Tailong]

To Maziel's point, depends on which military branch you join.  If you join a small State's National Guard, the politics is horrendous.  And Arm is 10-15% of a small State's National Guard.  So I don't know that I can agree with your stance.  Sorry.

I may eat this, and it may be considered gatekeeping, but if 'embrace the suck' isn't something you do as a team often (solving problems under duress together with a hodgepodge of weirdos), then I don't consider it to be the same thing.

Brother, I just got back last year from the fifth hottest country in the world solving problems with international partners with no budget. 

Maybe I can say it better this way:  At this point, the Commander (just one person) needs to make a decision based off of ALL of the staff-puke input they have received and drive us forward.  Consensus be damned!!   

Here, here, my good fellow. Here, here.

[Maziel]

To Maziel's point, depends on which military branch you join.  If you join a small State's National Guard, the politics is horrendous.  And Arm is 10-15% of a small State's National Guard.  So I don't know that I can agree with your stance.  Sorry.

I may eat this, and it may be considered gatekeeping, but if 'embrace the suck' isn't something you do as a team often (solving problems under duress together with a hodgepodge of weirdos), then I don't consider it to be the same thing.

Brother, I just got back last year from the fifth hottest country in the world solving problems with international partners with no budget. 

Maybe I can say it better this way:  At this point, the Commander (just one person) needs to make a decision based off of ALL of the staff-puke input they have received and drive us forward.  Consensus be damned!!   

There are so many directions I could take this.

Strangely enough, where you are isn't as indicative of being shitty as what you're doing and who you're with. Lot of people prefer Kuwait to being stationed in Texas, for instance. Sure, it's far hotter, but you also get messed with by your command a lot less. And you get to do your job - depending. Anywho, unless you joined as an officer, I would have thought you would have gotten my reference. But anyways. Experiences do vary wildly. My experience was way different than my brothers.

No decent commander is going to drive things forward without consulting his peers. Even a good Major shouldn't shy away from consulting a lowly SPC if that SPC happens to be good at their job. I've definitely been consulted before. It was weird having majors etc. in my cybersecurity class calling me 'sir' after I got out, though.

Other than that. Team building exercises are a life lesson to take from the military. There are others. I think trying to make an organizations governance operate like the military would be last on my list of things to take away - more in the don't do this, there aren't relevant applications category.

[dumbstruck]

Make all GMH and Noble House special roles open, but by Role Application only. - There are people who have spent YEARS putting in role application after role application and never getting them and other players who seem to get 'sponsored role' after 'sponsored role' and when you throttle it to role calls and stuff, it creates bottlenecks between times those roles tank, in addition to being reliant on being 'in favor' to get one of these roles.

Auto flag accounts at 6 months, 12 months, 18 months with karma. If someone proves to be breaking the game with an option you can take it away. No staff trust. I'm sorry. That's authoritarian as shit. That allows both favortism and grudges. Let's make this fair for everyone and take away the toys they abuse rather than refuse to give them toys.

Everyone's supposed to get the same amount of staff support, looking at staff numbers versus (now) player numbers, I think maybe let everyone have one 'story action' each month, as like, a measure of how far and much they can advance plots (leaders maybe get bonus ones), and I am using custom crafting as a measure here. Maybe you get a room changed, maybe you are getting an item made, maybe you are getting some custom ritual tattoo. Each of these is something that could be done relatively briefly but would make an amazing difference for players knowing they could pursue it.

I know, point 3 looks like it would create more work not less, but the idea here is that it creates a specific level of goal/activity that players know is looked at as 'reasonable' to try to achieve. It doesn't have to be the specific one I laid out, but laying it out like that was for that reason for sure.

[CirclelessBard]

In my opinion, there should not be a karma system. In fact, I would go so far as to say that staff should not have any mechanisms for judging roleplay quality and effort and tying that to role access. The fact that things like account/player notes and karma reductions have been abused by multiple iterations of the staff team taints player records and what staff have to go by when they decide on karma increases. The phenomenon of the "staff pet" fosters a culture of staff abuse towards players that are not favored and giving roles to a certain group of chosen players (or staff members) instead of giving fresh roleplayers a chance.

Changing the karma system to be based on playtime helps make the karma system fairer in that staff judgment is taken out of the equation, but also makes it unfair in a different way, by giving those that put the most time into the game a distinct advantage.

Other roleplaying games foster a culture of letting people have their turn playing the cool and special roles when it's their time. Maybe the game would benefit from a queue system for karma-only roles and sponsored roles. Each player queues up in one special role type that they're interested in, and when a spot frees up, the next player in queue has 1-2 weeks to wrap up their current character and make a new one to fill the spot, or swap positions in the queue with the next person in line if they're not ready yet. If such a system is in place, players that hold special role positions should have the decency to check in with themselves every once in a while and decide if they're still serving the game well by holding the role or if it's time to step aside and give someone else a chance.

---

Pursuant to the above, players should not have a say in how well they are playing either. There would be no need for judgmental observations of other roleplayers if there is no karma system. If you don't like how someone roleplays you should have the option not to play with them. I think Armageddon should familiarize itself with the concept of consensual roleplay, where players only play with players that want to play with them, and actual rules are in place for handling conflict instead of seeing who can type 'kill' quicker. It would require a slight reduction of immersion in exchange for a massive increase in comfort. The only time players should report other players is if they are not roleplaying at all. Roleplaying is a very low bar to clear.

---

I think the application system is out of date. Many games are using a post-approval process where characters enter the game immediately, and are reviewed after the fact, with any necessary changes proposed afterward. I think players could easily participate in this process.

[Nao]

[I've just removed a whole bunch of posts that were just two players throwing accusations at each other and derailing the thread. Please be kind.]

1. Show respect and kindness above all. This includes offensive actions and comments directed at someone's gender, sexual orientation, appearance, race, religion, language, etc. We respect healthy debate, but will not tolerate argumentative discourse. Discuss the idea, not each other.

[Kavrick]

Karma is the last thing I'd think should be automated due to the way players (including me) can be emotional. I would maybe agree that the first karma could be automated, then stuff like a "touched" gick would be a good test to how players behave in having access to magic. I will say, the six month period for getting your karma Is extremely dissuading for new players, and the game is already incredibly hostile to new players in a period where you want more people to be getting into the game, I'd personally prefer it more to be a 2/3 month period but I obviously have my biases.

[Maziel]

[I've just removed a whole bunch of posts that were just two players throwing accusations at each other and derailing the thread. Please be kind.]

1. Show respect and kindness above all. This includes offensive actions and comments directed at someone's gender, sexual orientation, appearance, race, religion, language, etc. We respect healthy debate, but will not tolerate argumentative discourse. Discuss the idea, not each other.

Thanks, I appreciate it.

[Jarvis]

Players cannot even get along in Discord or the forums, and can't even log into the game currently, but you want them to be in control of karma, roleplay, and character applications?

At this point, the burden is with players, not staff.

• Anyone who's been in the military knows that adversity, that is solving problems together, can bring anyone together. Not solving problems together and not being able to solve problems together is circular. Where you see a problem, I see an opportunity.
  
• Expecting either staff or players not to have any life to fulfill whatever is terrible. Both players and staff should be able to have a work/life balance. Happier and healthier staff effects players, and vice versa
• There (ideally) are far more players than staff
• Folks get along pretty well in the Arm discord Pooch has. Could ask him to take a look at the one you frequent and see if he has any input. Or just direct them to his for the simplest approach. Pooch probably wouldn't appreciate this, but I doubt he'd say no.

It's basically blockchain. We each verify the integrity of the others, and build together through consensus.

If you don't think the average Arm player is fun to play with, intelligent, and/or has valuable insight, then I'm not sure why you'd bother even playing.

"I think the best way to develop a game world is by letting the players influence it as much as possible"
#Delerak 2023

Comparing military levels of mental fortitude and comradery with this community feels absurd.
There are  some amazingly creative, intelligent, fun, wise and responsible people in this community.
There are also emotionally unhinged potato peels.

[Maziel]

Players cannot even get along in Discord or the forums, and can't even log into the game currently, but you want them to be in control of karma, roleplay, and character applications?

At this point, the burden is with players, not staff.

• Anyone who's been in the military knows that adversity, that is solving problems together, can bring anyone together. Not solving problems together and not being able to solve problems together is circular. Where you see a problem, I see an opportunity.
  
• Expecting either staff or players not to have any life to fulfill whatever is terrible. Both players and staff should be able to have a work/life balance. Happier and healthier staff effects players, and vice versa
• There (ideally) are far more players than staff
• Folks get along pretty well in the Arm discord Pooch has. Could ask him to take a look at the one you frequent and see if he has any input. Or just direct them to his for the simplest approach. Pooch probably wouldn't appreciate this, but I doubt he'd say no.

It's basically blockchain. We each verify the integrity of the others, and build together through consensus.

If you don't think the average Arm player is fun to play with, intelligent, and/or has valuable insight, then I'm not sure why you'd bother even playing.

"I think the best way to develop a game world is by letting the players influence it as much as possible"
#Delerak 2023

Comparing military levels of mental fortitude and comradely with this community feels absurd.
There are  some amazingly creative, intelligent, fun, wise and responsible people in this community.
There are also emotionally unhinged potato peels.

This is an improvement over the five posts (might be more) from [self-modded] that got deleted. You're mixing in the insults with your feedback.

You're making some assumptions here. Which I don't blame you for since you may be lacking context.

Yes, there are military people who have been through what you envision.

Most folks on active duty build a rapport 'embracing the suck' with their fellows dealing with stressfully orchestrated mundane nonsense made to:
1) Waste their time so they can't get their command in trouble for what they do outside of work
2) Build their ability to work together with a hodgepodge of weirdos with conflicting backgrounds/biases/etc

Imagine a bunch of privates sweating and reorganizing the same connex (steel shipping crate) in the desert daily because the command has a completely different layout they want them to follow.

The applicable lesson?
You get good at solving problems together by solving problems together.

Edit: I don't feel like drawing attention with a new post for it. *thumbs up* I like your follow up in your below post.

[Jarvis]

This is an improvement over the five posts (might be more) from Tailong that got deleted. You're mixing in the insults with your feedback.

You're making some assumptions here. Which I don't blame you for since you may be lacking context.

Yes, there are military people who have been through what you envision.

Most folks on active duty build a rapport 'embracing the suck' with their fellows dealing with stressfully orchestrated mundane nonsense made to:
1) Waste their time so they can't get their command in trouble for what they do outside of work
2) Build their ability to work together with a hodgepodge of weirdos with conflicting backgrounds/biases/etc

Imagine a bunch of privates sweating and reorganizing the same connex (steel shipping crate) in the desert daily because the command has a completely different layout they want them to follow.

The applicable lesson?
You get good at solving problems together by solving problems together.

No you're completely right. I don't mean to come across as blatantly insulting unspecified people, but in my eyes atleast, I don't think everyone (or atleast a good portion of this community) has the maturity to do this, and it doesn't have group accountability the same way any bootcamp platoon does. No foul intentions here, I just think its a fact that we gotta acknowledge in order to work with it instead of expecting every single person to behave and try

Edit: Add in the fact that this game tends to draw people who are socially isolated / outcasted / limited and that doesn't exactly help

[Seeker]

These are not all original.  Many of these ideas are merely a synthesis of previous suggestions by smarter people.  I like the idea of individual staff being able to have individual "single-focus" abilities also, but these are rough thoughts for structure only.

PART FIRST

Animators - These are now the buffer position between staff and players. They

  *   May not play PCs while an active Animator.  This can be where players go between PCs or just because it turns out to be a fun and interesting way to interact with the game.  There might be a time limit between when your last PC was played and you may begin Animating (two weeks?)
  *   They may not normally create or load items or NPCs
  *   May not see or access the databases
  *   They may not see who plays what PC or see pfiles
  *   They may animate any NPC or mob that is not "Admin or Clan-locked"
  *   do room echoes and environmental emotes
  *   May see Wishes and may respond to Wishes in a limited fashion, (i.e. if only to say that no one is around who can specifically address the request etc.)
  *   May go to IMM-only rooms to retrieve Lost and Found Objects
  *   Not permitted to be visible in the game-world or directly communicate with players
  *   Has no staff access to the Request Tool
  *   Has no access to the IMM boards but a special Animator Board might be created
  *   Additional responsibilities may be individually assigned to proven individuals (applications, limited mob load-ups, etc.)

Animators' roles is to enliven the game-world.  They generally may not change the world but may take most features of it and bring it to life for the players.  Their fundamental task is to simulate a more realistic environment by animating static NPCs and mobs.  They need to be able to communicate effectively so that the experiences they have created are not overlooked or forgotten by other Animators, Storytellers and Administrators.

[Jarvis]

These are not all original.  Many of these ideas are merely a synthesis of previous suggestions by smarter people.  I like the idea of individual staff being able to have individual "single-focus" abilities also, but these are rough thoughts for structure only.

PART FIRST

Animators - These are now the buffer position between staff and players. They

  *   May not play PCs while an active Animator.  This can be where players go between PCs or just because it turns out to be a fun and interesting way to interact with the game.  There might be a time limit between when your last PC was played and you may begin Animating (two weeks?)
  *   They may not normally create or load items or NPCs
  *   May not see or access the databases
  *   They may not see who plays what PC or see pfiles
  *   They may animate any NPC or mob that is not "Admin or Clan-locked"
  *   do room echoes and environmental emotes
  *   May see Wishes and may respond to Wishes in a limited fashion, (i.e. if only to say that no one is around who can specifically address the request etc.)
  *   May go to IMM-only rooms to retrieve Lost and Found Objects
  *   Not permitted to be visible in the game-world or directly communicate with players
  *   Has no staff access to the Request Tool
  *   Has no access to the IMM boards but a special Animator Board might be created
  *   Additional responsibilities may be individually assigned to proven individuals (applications, limited mob load-ups, etc.)

Animators' roles is to enliven the game-world.  They generally may not change the world but may take most features of it and bring it to life for the players.  Their fundamental task is to simulate a more realistic environment by animating static NPCs and mobs.  They need to be able to communicate effectively so that the experiences they have created are not overlooked or forgotten by other Animators, Storytellers and Administrators.

I adore this idea

[FantasyWriter]

Just asking: Are we sure we want to take active PCs out of the game just to animate?

[Riev]

Just asking: Are we sure we want to take active PCs out of the game just to animate?

For the Creative Animator roles? Yes.
If your talent/focus is providing animations and appropriate world reactions, then I would rather that be what you do when you're on Armageddon.
Similarly, I don't want my Marketing Team at work to be answering the phone for the IT Help Desk. COULD they? Sure. But I'd rather them do what they're here to do.

[Narf]

Just asking: Are we sure we want to take active PCs out of the game just to animate?

It could be a pretty efficient way of getting new players involved quickly. A lot more than just having an extra PC running around *somewhere* that they *might* run into.

Might be good to establish a ratio though, as it's a diminishing return sort of deal. The more you have, the less valuable they'll be.

[DesertT]

These are not all original.  Many of these ideas are merely a synthesis of previous suggestions by smarter people.  I like the idea of individual staff being able to have individual "single-focus" abilities also, but these are rough thoughts for structure only.

PART FIRST

Animators - These are now the buffer position between staff and players. They

  *   May not play PCs while an active Animator.  This can be where players go between PCs or just because it turns out to be a fun and interesting way to interact with the game.  There might be a time limit between when your last PC was played and you may begin Animating (two weeks?)
  *   They may not normally create or load items or NPCs
  *   May not see or access the databases
  *   They may not see who plays what PC or see pfiles
  *   They may animate any NPC or mob that is not "Admin or Clan-locked"
  *   do room echoes and environmental emotes
  *   May see Wishes and may respond to Wishes in a limited fashion, (i.e. if only to say that no one is around who can specifically address the request etc.)
  *   May go to IMM-only rooms to retrieve Lost and Found Objects
  *   Not permitted to be visible in the game-world or directly communicate with players
  *   Has no staff access to the Request Tool
  *   Has no access to the IMM boards but a special Animator Board might be created
  *   Additional responsibilities may be individually assigned to proven individuals (applications, limited mob load-ups, etc.)

Animators' roles is to enliven the game-world.  They generally may not change the world but may take most features of it and bring it to life for the players.  Their fundamental task is to simulate a more realistic environment by animating static NPCs and mobs.  They need to be able to communicate effectively so that the experiences they have created are not overlooked or forgotten by other Animators, Storytellers and Administrators.

This is an interesting idea that could use some tweaking, but overall, pretty solid!!

[whengravityfails]

Just asking: Are we sure we want to take active PCs out of the game just to animate?

I don't. Let them keep a normal PC to play non-leadership roles. I played at a MUD that didn't allow any sort of staff role to play PCs at all and it ended up turning out quite terribly.

[BadSkeelz]

If we have so many Staff that restricting them from playing PCs while they Staff is an active detriment, then we have too many Staff. Especially for what they are (or aren't) doing.

We have a ratio of what, one storyteller to every 10 or 15 active characters? That's an incredibly favorable ratio that should be delivering a very lively game world. Except in my experience Staff are mostly interacted with through the Request tool. Sometimes they'll animate an NPC clan superior to crawl up your ass (particularly if you happen to antagonize an OOC friend or maybe even that same staff's PC). The best case scenario is when they run a big RPT "dungeon crawl" which are legitimately the most fun thing a Staffer can do for players other than approve their characters.

It's honestly frustrating playing and bumping in to 3-4 staff PCs, because you're essentially being made an accessory to hypocrisy.