What kind of game is Armageddon? What kind of game should it be?

[Brokkr]

I see it as a collaborative, but not cooperative, storytelling exercise about characters being in competitive conflict with one another.

[Windstorm]

It's clearly a diverse game with a lot of different ways to play it, with a lot of different players who have differing visions and playstyles. Players - not just PCs - wind up in conflict I think on an OOC level because a lot of those visions sort of conflict.

* Roleplaying people want you to emote and think more and play out an interesting narrative. They get really invested in their PCs and create stories and emotions.

* Combatty competitive people want you to let them spar, increase their skills, and accept it when you die. They move onto the next PC easily. "Who cares, it's just pixels?!"

* Wilderness people want a harsh environment and deadly creatures and stuff that's going to challenge them in the gameworld.

Meeting in the middle somewhere between the people we most enjoy playing with mostly creates fun experiences, but maybe the most fun experiences are had when people in the same range of expectations get together and cooperate or even compete with that sort of understanding, whether it's flowery-emoting roleplayers dueling via political means, Rinthis stalking each other around, or hunters bringing down a mek in the wilderness.

A lot of people are really entrenched wherever they lie in this spectrum. It's inevitable no one really unified vision emerges. We all just have to find ways to sort of make it fun for each other wherever in the middle we wind up meeting.

[Seeker]

I see it as a collaborative, but not cooperative, storytelling exercise about characters being in competitive conflict with one another.

This is a really pretty good terse summation.  I'll try this modest adjustment.

I see it as a collaborative, but not necessarily cooperative, storytelling exercise about characters being in a conflict for survival in social, political and environmental theatres.

[Yelinak]

I see it as a collaborative, but not cooperative, storytelling exercise about characters being in competitive conflict with one another.

It has not manifested in any tangible way for quite a few years. It has failed to be what you describe, thanks to a lack of effort to maintain what you describe.

It has, instead, been a boring wankfest where nothing mattered and nobody had any real conflict with anybody, because the game itself failed to uphold any such thing.

It should not be difficult to ensure that most clans have goals that conflict with some other clan's, but it has felt like nobody cared to make it so that this was the case.

As a consequence, this game has been incredibly boring for a very long time.

[Jimpka_Moss]

Hey Yelinak, I was hoping you could clarify/qualify what you mean if at all possible without changing your meaning? The way the 'you' comes across there feels like, only seems like so far, like it's calling out one specific person for the end result instead of something more broad. I think it's merely because of the quote that it seems directed at anyone specific, but if that's how you intended it, I couldn't suggest a better way to be clearer than you have. (disclaimer: I get I'm asking you to change your words, but what I hope for is clarity, not a change in opinion. Thanks in advance.)