post-mission assessment
Hello, Audentes! With the completion of the Zeta-12 mission, we'd like to once again open up a discussion on game observations. To view our previous post-mission assessment, click here.Game updates:- TEAM NAME: Our characters' specific ALASTAIR team was selected as being called Audentes, which derives from the Latin phrase audentes Fortuna iuvat -- "fortune favors the bold."
- BOUNTY BOARD: Beginning with Zeta-12, we now have a bounty board so characters may work on side missions to keep them busy during the mission proper. The number of bounties will be scaled to how long we spend in each mission world. If you haven't yet looked at the bounty board, please give it a glance! Players may submit their own bounties for approval as well. We will be adding the bounty board to the main nav for easier access.
- CAST CAP: To better suit the needs of our changing playerbase, we have recently lowered the cast cap from eight to six.
- AC CHANGES: As a preventative measure, we now require one AC proof (of two) to be from a non-castmate. In other words, Clark Kent can no longer submit two threads he had with Bruce Wayne during the same AC period, but he may submit one proof from Bruce Wayne and the other from Han Solo.
Future changes:- PLAYER CAP vs. CHARACTER CAP: This suggestion was brought to our attention several months ago, and we have been discussing it amongst ourselves. Currently, we have a character cap which means we only allow 80 characters in-game, with a maximum of three characters per player. The proposed change would move us to a player cap, which would limit the number of players in-game, with a continued maximum of three characters per player.
A hypothetical player cap would be lower than 80 (likely between 60-70), which would lower the potential amount of players in game, but would take the pressure off players who worry that apping multiple characters would take up a "slot" that could be filled by someone else. Applications from current players would be able to be reviewed each weekend instead of waiting in the queue. This could potentially result in creating a more intimate game experience, with current players being able to exercise more freedom in switching out characters and continuing momentum.
As of August 18th, we currently have 62 players in game, with only 7 playing more than one character. If we adopt a player cap, we would grandfather in anyone above the number, whatever it may be.
Please let us know your thoughts on switching to a potential player cap! We will be taking player opinions and concerns into consideration, as this impacts the entire game.
Zeta-12 Review- PASS/FAIL MECHANIC: We introduced a new pass/fail mechanic in the Zeta-12 mission. (Please remember to fill out your progress report before August 31st, 23:59 UTC! It is required to pass AC this month.) Our intent in having a "report card" is to ensure character actions have more of an impact on the result of each mission. Having the progress report be required for AC is to ensure players are involved in our missions!
- CHOOSE YOUR OWN ADVENTURE: As a trial run, we gave you the chance to submit character actions to certain subthreads and receive results that were RNGed but took into account the course of action chosen. While this was used for the report card this mission, it might or might not be in the future.
- PLOT: Our aim was to give a lighthearted break from the intensity of Nalawi and have a mostly open mission. This was a mini-mission at about half the length of a normal mission -- let us know if you would like more mini-missions interspersed with regular length ones in the future -- and due to its nature, had a much simpler, less involved plot. We included elements like caretaking/escorting natives, a focus on player vs. nature conflict, and a higher level of customization.
- YOUR THOUGHTS?: Let us know what you thought about Zeta-12! What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see in the future, and what would you not like to see again?
|
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
futurologists) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
axiology2016-08-19 07:21 pm
Player Cap
Counting my rejected app, I sat in that queue for six weeks in total, and I know I would have been demoralised seeing reams of the quick-stream apps going through while I waited! At the time I had the comfort that at least if a present player wanted to apply for a second character they had to join the back of the queue just like me.
Zeta-12
no subject
Thoughts on game mechanics
My initial impulse is to say that we should retain the character cap. The biggest aversion I would have, were I new to the game, would be the waiting queue, and knowing that the 60 player limit would mean I might have to wait until someone dropped two characters, not one, would make wait times hypothetically longer. I don't think it'd alleviate the pressure of the queue that we have going here, but would rather incentivize multiple character applications once a player got into the game (especially if they'll be allowed in ahead of the line), which in my opinion would be a mixed blessing. This needs more careful deliberation about who you want in the game and why (who being characters, players, etc.)
All games have churn where players try a character out, find they're not working for whatever reason, and either try again or move on. I feel that with our current cast-cap drops and AC precautions, the mod team is really hanging a lampshade on players needing to tag out more--which is great--but it conflicts with the idea of a player cap in that it's still not getting to the gritty details of 'making newbies feel more welcome and slowing the roll of app-in-drop-out that current rule changes seem to attempt to address.
Zeta-12 Review Thoughts
The pass/fail mechanic appended to AC is a game changer, though I feel it's appropriate given we also have an AC bank. I hope it is not too much work for the mods, and I fear that that extra thread cross-checking might overwhelm you guys over time, especially if someone ollies out as mods are wont to do every now and again. Is the intention of this also to whittle out those who are sitting on a spot? I think that if you include this in all upcoming missions, you'll be fine for the possible cap changes: odds are that someone failing to fill out this report card/who can't be arsed to will flake off more quickly, freeing up more spots and making the app queue less daunting. It also means that those who want a second character but who aren't sure about it will (hopefully) not feel so bad--and their players will be more familiar with the AC process! Everybody wins? (Except for those who are lazy or those who make frequent and silly mistakes.... >_>;)
I loved the CYOA mechanic and while I can't see it being sensible with every mission, I'd be all for seeing it (or different iterations of it) in the future! Maybe we could use it to RNG the success of the entire group who signed up for one choice instead of another, to further emphasize IC teamwork and community?
The plot was admittedly really fun for me. I would like to see these every now and again, either just the idea of a shorter, less involved mission, or more player vs. nature... or even more nurturing aspects of characters being put on trial--all of these things were a hit, for me at least. Thanks! I wouldn't expect them constantly, but you guys chose a good time for this one.
As for what didn't work... really, this one was much easier to get involved in for me, and though I still wound up missing about every other week due to tag loads and my IRL work-load taking away from RP time, I didn't often feel completely overwhelmed. I've enjoyed building up a foundation of CR with other players that wasn't gritty or ICly morally crushing, which after Nalawi was a relief. I'm not sure how other players feel, but having those ins will be really useful in future mission threads, as I hope that Laedo will be able to see team members as valuable and unique. I wonder if more people dropped during this mission than the average, or less? I wasn't really keeping stats on hand, but I'd be curious to keep a longitudinal sort of study of what plots are interesting to what demographic of players, you know? Maybe having heavier plots and lighter ones interspersed when the app queue is at different ebbs and flows will help engage more of the population of our game for longer.
(My inner nerd wants to start compiling graphs of apps-to-drops and length-of-players-in-game, but that's a serious digression that's mostly given to blithering rn.)
TL;DR: It was a good one, thanks!
no subject
But in the end I'm already in the game, so it's no skin off my nose!
no subject
Because it's an issue that's been discussed on and off for some months: Pacing I found was better in this mission than the last. I liked that there were events that mapped not-quite-exactly to RL timeflow, and I liked that we got some breathing room between logs. I myself still feel as if I could do with a slower pace, as there were a few times I felt really overloaded... but a job will expand to the time allotted, and I understand that you guys have to work to balance the quick-draws with the slow-mos.
Pass-fail was a good addition, as well as the personally-filled-out report card. I liked in particular that it wasn't fed to us beforehand what the pass-fail mechanics would be, but neither was the threshold for success so high that anyone who was genuinely engaging with the plot would miss out. Good balance. I am curious if anyone actually failed to have three threads to show with their squidge. CYOA was similarly a boon. I loved having a bit of randomization re: what kind of shenanigans a character got up to, and in a couple of cases it led to fun threads with friends that I might not have otherwise gotten.
The plot being light-hearted was a fantastic break. I love the idea of utilizing the different narrative options for conflict -- person vs. environment is one I haven't played in much and it was a treat. The slightly gentler pace, and the general lack of external contention, left the door open for fantastic CR opportunities, including a lot of the kind of CR I look forward to Oska for. I'm all for characters striving against a force greater than them, but I really, really appreciated the semi-short sojourn into an environment where we had more personal control over what kinds of contention our characters got involved in. I had the chance to develop CR with Evan that I otherwise would not have, and that lays some fun groundwork. From a purely IC perspective, it also allowed my character -- who is at core not a self-confident person -- to develop some proficiencies and become a little more secure in his ability to adapt to new physical environments without it having to be due to traumatizing experiences. He healed a little from some stuff that happened in Nalawi. It was useful to his arc.
I would be all for having gentler missions like this one pop up between the serious, dramatic and scary stuff. Right now, I think I'm going to go into the next dramatic mission feeling refreshed and ready to make Evan squirm again.
The cast cap and the AC changes are things I deeply appreciate. Thank you for being proactive, mods! Swapping to a player cap seems like it would have some benefits... but I think it would slow down the ability for new people to app, if even just a little bit, and I don't know. It kind of seems like a six of one, half a dozen of another situation. I'm pretty on the fence about it.
tl;dr: Keep up the good work, you guys are amazing!
no subject
As far as this plot went... I know we wanted 'lighter' but this felt too light. Perhaps because the world just fundamentally lacked substance to it. It didn't really leave much for those people who weren't terribly interested in the mission goal to do. Compare that to the last plot, where there was a lot more clearly defined, and much more variety for people to come up with their own thing, vs. just constantly fighting wildlife or playing daycare.
And I'm going to admit that while I didn't mind having to report my choices on things, because it was mostly quick and simple, I'm not a fan of the report card, and especially not fond of it being mandatory. We already have AC every month, and reoccurring HMDs. Piling even more mandatory paperwork to keep track of is... it seems pointlessly bureaucratic, to me. Especially when it requires links. If you want to judge the mission success/failure for IC-reasons, a simple poll would be sufficient, I think. And as far as OOC participation... that's what AC is for.
no subject
no subject
ZETA-12.
Pass/fail. I don't mind the idea of pass fail, but I don't care for the requirements being sprung on us last minute, too late for anyone to really put together an alternative. I also didn't like that they needed to be ac length, but not network. Say I focused on Network for my AC: I would have failed. When you walk in for a final, a good prof lets you know what to study for. If you're going to keep up a pass/fail mechanic — which for the record, I think is a good idea — I think you need to be more upfront about your expectations.
Choose your own adventure. It was a cute addition, as was evolving our squidges. I liked character choices resulting in actual consequences and changes. I would love to see more of this in the future.
Plot. I wasn't someone that thought we needed things to be more lighthearted. That said I did like the mission for the most part, it was cute and very charming.
My thoughts. I will say that I would like a little more variety in logs. I did a lot in the first log, but the next two weren't very different. In general logs in this game seem to be, walk here. Collect this. There's rarely variety between those two, and when there is, it's rare. This is a game about team mechanics, so I'd love to see more of this. Splitting into groups of ten or something for assignments while on a mission, some being on recon and some being offensive, maybe getting jobs or tasks that they wouldn't sign themselves up for on their own?
Also, I just DESPERATELY WISH for more dynamic choices. We sort of got a sample of this in Zeta-12 and I want more. Characters being forced to make choices that change them as a person. Forcing them outside of their comfort zones. In general, I don't really want light hearted plots. I want my characters to grow and learn and change. Collecting things and walking places doesn't really change my characters, I just would like a little more development options out of the game as a whole. Dangerous situations, dire consequences, drama, that sort of thing. I would love more NPCs, or even NPCs that we as players can manipulate. I would love for mod plots to be more flexible for player ideas. It often comes down to it can be a, or b. Or maybe c. If your playerbase comes to you with C, D, or E... why not explore that? For that matter, why not give characters the opportunity to go against the grain, and perhaps face consequences for it?
Overall, though, this is one of the best run games I've been in on DW! I admire how efficient and thoughtful you are as mods. These critiques are obviously my personal thoughts, in general I have been very happy in this game and that's why I want to help it improve if I can! Thanks for the work you guys do, the openness and flexibility and willingness to learn and make things better for your players. You're doing a great job and I think we can only get better.
no subject
no subject
Initially I felt in favor of the idea, but reading people's responses, I realized that I was loving the idea from the perspective of someone in game. It does indeed seem like it would be aimed at keeping new players out, actually, and it would make people more likely to app new characters impulsively and have a rotating roster just to stay in the game while they're not feeling someone else rather than deeply investing in a character's storyline (which is the appeal, imo, of a plot-based game like this—knowing that I'm surrounded by people who are interested in deeply investing in stories and not just one-off/frills). I see that you've said that players are the true limiting factor for your ability to provide things for the game, not characters, but I just don't see it because if you're personalizing things, they should be personalized to characters, not players. Idk.
Zeta-12:
Drawing hearts around the pacing because there was always something new to do. The choice-based system really set up great opportunities for CR hooks. The diversity of plot points from fights to survival to persuading really helped make it so, in my opinion, all different kinds of characters had a chance to shine. I REALLY liked the pass/fail mechanic and honestly it was important to me that you did not communicate the standards for "pass" until the end of the mission. People should be motivated to participate in the mission and engage with its elements because they are active in the game, not try to meet a "quota" only to stop. I similarly really liked the hard limits and deadlines on choices to be made. It felt, on the whole, more organic and as though character choices decided the outcomes. The RNG was exciting for the same reason.
eta: Oh and I wasn't in the game for any of the depressing missions, but I joined because I was interested in the moral quandaries they posed, so I was kind of disappointed to jump in on a softball. Not to say that light-hearted components can't make up heavier missions, but the climax didn't feel climactic because grief/tragedy/moral questions = stakes.
no subject
no subject
I'm actually... in favor of a Player Cap over a Character Cap! Of course, I'm saying this as someone who already has two characters in game, so my bias is pretty obvious. I can understand where other people are coming from though, that as an outside apper perspective, they might be more hesitant to app into a game where there were limited player slots, I think it might be something worth trying out? I mean, the way we wound up with rolling apps to begin with is because there was a test to see how applications would run most smoothly. I think, at the very least, it would be something worth running a trial of, but if most people oppose it, that's fine too obviously.
Pass/Fail
I like the idea of pass/fail a lot better! It also promotes the idea of "involvement in the plot as a whole" rather than "vote on what outcome you want" or whatever.
Plot
I reeeeaally liked this plot, ngl lol. It was fun! There was still drama, there were still decisions/choices, but it felt lighthearted and a nice breather. I get that this probably cant be the main kind of plot all the time, but I really appreciated this.
zeta-12 review
no subject
no subject
I've never been in a game with a player cap before, so I have to admit that my initial knee-jerk reaction was kind of ehhh. But thinking about it, I kind of like the unique way Futurology handles things (I can't actually think of any other game that does rolling apps + has a cap), so I don't really have a problem with doing things "differently" than the rest of DWRP and focusing more on a smaller group of players. As Jean said, though, I'm speaking as someone who already has two character in-game so... I might be biased lmao. BUT BASICALLY I like the idea of a more intimate game, +1 for player cap.
PASS/FAIL MECHANIC.
I like it! Like others have said, I thought that not telling us the requirements beforehand was very good, because then it kind of makes sure players aren't just ticking things off boxes in order to pass. (It made it very clear to me that I wasn't pulling my weight with one of my characters as well, which in turn made me reconsider what I wanted to do with them in-game.) Compiling the links for the form was a little bit of a hassle, so I'd like to see something simpler in the future, but in general I thought it was a good addition and I'd love to see it in future missions!
PLOT.
I really like the idea of mini-missions. I can understand it might be an underwhelming intro to new players/characters, but as a longterm player, I appreciate the breather it provided.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I think I'm inclined to agree with others who've said that the player cap could potentially be off-putting to new players. It's nice to get new players into a game, and I think that if the player cap had been in place when I was apping in, I would have likely chosen the other game I had been looking at due to feeling a little intimidated by a game that seemed to favour current players. I also think that 80 characters is a good number for a game like this, and the player cap could potentially lead to more characters in the game. I saw that you mentioned the reasons for the player cap being that it enables you to more easily tailor the game to the people within it, which I think is a nice idea, but it seems to me that it would make more sense to tailor events etc to characters rather than players, as someone else mentioned. In that light, I feel a character cap makes more sense!
Ultimately though, as the mods of the game, you'll have better insight into what works for you and your game and so I'm aware there could be perspectives I'm not seeing. These are just my thoughts on the matter!
Zeta-12 thoughts
I'll admit that initially I was quite turned off by the idea of this mission, and even contemplated hiatusing through it because of my general dislike of anything too fluffy and cute. I didn't think there'd be much I could do with the character I play in terms of a mission like this, and in general I prefer darker plots with more potential for angst/drama/trauma/moral quandaries etc.
However! I actually ended up enjoying this mission quite a lot, and found that there was lots of space for character growth precisely BECAUSE my character was so far outside of his comfort zone in terms of having to play carer. The relaxed aspect of the mission and the environment itself also proved challenging for my character and as such I probably got more out of it than I would from a mission that was based on lots of battles etc. I was pleasantly surprised! It worked out really well. I guess what I'm saying here is it's good to mix things up because you never know what you'll be able to get out of something until you play it!
I do think it's good to have less intense missions interspersed with the intense ones in order to give characters and players some space to process, and I found the pacing and length of the mission were just right.
In terms of the pass/fail aspect, I suppose I'm slightly in two minds-- on the one hand, I feel like having too many compulsory aspects to fill in can potentially take some of the fun out of a game, and it is, after all, supposed to be fun. However, I didn't find the requirements of the pass/fail elements difficult to meet, and I liked that the terms weren't given to us beforehand as it may have created pressure for people to play out certain things, as well as possibly leading some people to only concentrate on meeting a certain quota of threads rather than playing around more widely. Perhaps making it essential in order to pass AC isn't something I'd necessarily like, but at the same time I think it worked out okay so it wouldn't cause too much of a problem. Am I even making sense, I don't know, haha. Basically I think I mean I'm okay with it if this is going to be a recurring thing.
I really liked the CYOA aspect! It'd definitely be fun to see that used again in future missions.
Overall I was pleasantly surprised, it turned out much better than I initially expected and I had a lot of fun with it. Thank you!
no subject
I honestly don't know what the winning choice is here. On one hand, a player cap is more convenient for people who are already in the game and just want to app another character, but then you're making it difficult for potential new players for the game or returning players. I don't know if there's maybe a good middling mechanic here that's going to satisfy everyone's needs somehow. I think really the only way we're gonna find some happy medium is to have the mentality of "try something new, and if it doesn't work just go back to the way we did it before." If a player cap overall has a positive feeling to it, give it a shot, and if it turns out to not really work, I don't see why can't just go back to character caps. The only way you're gonna know if something works is if you give it a try.
zeta-12
pass/fail - I actually don't have a problem with this, and I think it'll be kind of nice to see how it works in regard to mission success. It keeps players involved and has them seriously consider what they're doing during the mission. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it being required for AC yet, but then I was pretty involved in this plot, seeing how it was my first.
choose your own adventure - I'm a slut for this. I loved it. I think I remember you also kept open a "CHOOSE OTHER" option during these, which is helpful if someone has a different idea of what their character would be doing.
plot - I liked it a lot? Of course, this was my first, so I dunno what the others were like. It was nice and easygoing, though, and really kind of caused Hanzo be slightly less of a dick, so it was enjoyable for me and developed him positively.
no subject
PASS/FAIL - I didn't mind this at all, but Futuro is my home game and I only have the one character so it wasn't hard to meet the requirements. I can see how it might be offputting to some people, but I think so long as passing AC is not contingent on passing the mission but rather only filling out the report card (which I believe is how the system works now?), it shouldn't be a huge deal. Especially since (I assume) it'll only happen once every two-three months.
CYOA - Liked it and would enjoy seeing it again.
PLOT - Not particularly my cup of tea but I understand that liking some missions and disliking others is the nature of a mission-based game, so I don't believe this is something that has to change. Besides, I'm a big girl capable of making my own fun - if the overall plot doesn't work for me, I can do my own thing. I did like the shorter length of this mission though, and think interspersing mini-missions between larger ones is a good idea.
no subject
PLAYER CAP vs. CHARACTER CAP:
As several people above me have said, I'm wary about this because honestly I feel like it would be discouraging to new players, and if we think the queue wait can be kind of bad now (at weeks? sometimes depending on when you app), then I think it will only get worse with a player cap, because theoretically it would be encouraging players to app multiple chars so you'd then have to wait for someone to drop multiple chars and leave the game entirely before a slot opened up. If it truly made the mod team job easier and opened up better avenues for the game, I wouldn't mind giving it a trial run, I suppose, but... not a fan.
PASS/FAIL MECHANIC:
While I don't mind having a "report card" of sorts that serves as a summary of how the character did on the mission/a gauge for how involved a player is?, I'd prefer it be incorporated into the AC somehow rather than be a totally separate thing to fill out/potentially forget to fill out.
CHOOSE YOUR OWN ADVENTURE:
I don't know how sustainable it is, or how well it would work in a more high-stakes mission when you kind of need decisions made right now in order to move plot forward, but for these more leisurely "break" missions it was fun.
PLOT:
I appreciated the break from back-to-back high stakes violence-heavy missions, and I would definitely like more of them in the future, but. I definitely think they need to be shorter.
Because of the nature of the game, people tend to app characters more accustomed to plot-heavy action things, so while it can be fun to explore brief periods of downtime with things like caretaking and what not, I think it puts a lot of people in the position of feeling like they're stuck/not here for what they signed up for. I know I saw a lot of comments going around about people wanting to hiatus/sit out Zeta-12, and that was discouraging to see, because obviously we all want to play together, so.
If the "break" missions were shorter, I think they'd still give us the advantage of a "break" without making people feel stagnant or bored. I'd propose max 1 month instead of 2, and 1-2 logs instead of 4.
no subject
...It's a pretty specific instance that that would happen in, but more generally, especially if many players decide to take on more than one character, waiting for those players to drop every character before a newbie can move in is going to make the game less accessible, which has the potential to promote some hard feelings on their side.
no subject
PLAYER CAP vs. CHARACTER CAP; so i had just apped in a second character, and admittedly i have some lowkey guilt about it because in a capped game, i definetly want everyone to get the chance to play who they'd like, where they'd like. i take comfort in the turnover rate of the game as a whole, however, in that there really only seems to be a lag in application acceptances whenever plot dictates it. that being said, i would have to agree with the general consensus that a player cap would come off as a bit unwelcoming, despite the good intentions that lie behind it. it is definitely nice to think that the mods would love to use the player cap as a way to cater and tailor the game a bit more to the playerbase, but whether it be 62 or 30 or 80 players, the likelihood of pleasing a vast majority doesn't really change, i think. also, i think this past mission just proves that even if a current player isn't feeling the current mission, with enough initiative and enough wiggle room in the plot itself, they are more than free to make it their own and do something that is more their cup of tea. really, it's on the players to make the most of a game as much as it is on the mods running it!
PASS/FAIL; my response to this is probably a bit more biased than most, because i happened to enjoy the zeta-12 mission and thus was heavily involved in it, so completing the report card wasn't too difficult at all for me. i can definitely see where some might feel it a bit restrictive, like it's somehow "policing" their play. i think the concept of 'pass/fail' is a bit misleading, though, because as i understand it — a character "fails" if their squidge does not get to fully evolve. and their squidge doesn't full evolve only if they don't get to submit the right choices in each log. this mission was more a matter of checking in and and deadlines, because each choice wasn't requiring a thread for proof. on paper, it doesn't sound too bad, but i can agree that the sheer number of them might have gotten a bit too much. it was easy enough for me to check in, because i track the comms for mod posts, but i can see where others might get lost along the way, particularly if they've had a pretty busy summer.
tldr; i like that you're trying to figure out new ways to ensure characters' participation in games! i definitely don't think it should stop. maybe, next time, it can be substituted instead of ac, just so that it doesn't feel like it's too much "paperwork"? just a suggestion!
i also love love loved how this plot catered to character/player impact. i think last hmd one of the criticisms was about how it felt like character choices didn't feel like it mattered at all in the plot, because it was already sort of "pre-set" and i just think this egg baby mission was a really really clever way of addressing that issue. so kudos on that front!
CYOA; i also thought this was really clever. and, iirc, delays on responses didn't seem to be an issue at all, so that is also a nice bonus! while i didn't participate in it this time around (boo my character played it too safe lol) it was really neat to see others play with this feature! and i think it added a nice variety to each log, too. though i will say that because a majority of (if not all?) of the cyoa aspects regarded separating characters, it was hard to incorporate it into play when most other characters are elsewhere, and therefore unable to be engaged. if that makes sense?
PLOT; I LOVED THIS PLOT, lol. i personally didn't think it lasted for too long at all, though i know pacing will always be an issue because it's tough to find a balance when each mission is so different. like a few people have mentioned, each mission is essentially a gamble, which i think we are all very aware of when we app in our characters. each mission has definitely been an "adventure" which is really all that the premise of futuro promises you, so i don't think there's been anything misleading about it. i appreciate that you've taken this opportunity to give us a break from all the doom and gloom; i think it was mentioned in the previous hmd but since futuro is advertised as a "save the timelines/worlds" game, the idea is generally that there is essentially something positive to be found in each mission. i feel like the first two had a heavy emphasis on action (which is nice!) but definitely a bit grim, whereas this past mission focused more on the lighter aspects of actually helping a planet (which is great!) but i can see where people might have found it a bit too much. i think either extreme is bound to find some opposition, but overall i think you all did really well with this what you intended for this mission to be. i am definitely in favor of lighter missions interspersed with the more intense missions...
though i think it would be worth clarifying what you mean in terms of "lighter" and "intense." is lighter and intense regarding genre/themes or pacing/number of events? or both? i think there are a number of us who may not be too clear on that matter, and thus the confusion with regards to expectations!
no subject
As for having to "wait" for established players to drop all their characters before someone new can come in, we have enough of a steady drop rate (I track the drop page and keep a spreadsheet :V) that I don't really anticipate the wait being much longer than it is now, anyway. Most people who have two characters tend to stick around for awhile, it's the players who only have one who usually drop, just from my observations.
no subject
You're probably right! I'm curious to see how a player cap would work, myself. I'd be tempted to take on another character even though I know my tagging pace would become glacial with them, but since it's not really hurting anyone and people seem to be okay with back-tags, I guess that wouldn't be too much of a problem.
I have a question, actually! Since most of the drops are by those who've only got one character, are they also mostly from relative newbies, or have you noticed an equal amount of people here for more than one/two months dropping out with those who have been around for less? I feel like the latter are more frequent, but I've nothing with which to verify that! No real reason; I'm just curious.
no subject
Hmm.
What if there was an option that allowed players to show they were doing their own thing? Since we're using the school and report card analogy (though I'm getting squeamish about the paperwork aspect too, lol) if players could report on some special project in the form of developing a part of a character's arc, or showing off some cross-canon CR that they were really jazzed about, it might be another way for mods to hook in to where their playerbase is shining? An example from this mission might be (just off the top of my head) a place where Sieglinde was showing off the arm wrestling match between Achilles and McCree and how much hubbub that generated. That technically would not be considered a pass, but it was a very successful moment in Zeta-12 to get characters to interact. Perhaps to tie it back in to Zeta-12's driving directive, all of the present squidges would be given a bonus to strength or beards or I don't know, some silly acknowledgement.
Do you figure something that allowed you to show off the parts that you were enjoying (or maybe parts where you were struggling with but wanted to make work) would be useful for mods to be clued into? I might just be on my high horse again!
no subject
As for drops!! Most players seem to either be in it for the long haul or leave after a few months. We don't typically get drops from people who have just apped in. It might be interesting to start tracking retention rate to see the exact numbers, but just from keeping track of our cast counts, we seem to have a pretty solid number of people who app in and stick around for awhile.
no subject
no subject
This is a mission-based game! While we have no intention of pushing our players' hands, it's important that the characters themselves feel like the outcomes of what they're doing are important. What we're trying to get at is a system in which characters for whom it is IC to pass would, and characters for whom it is IC to fail also would, without affecting the player's activity.
We hope that clarifies our stance!
no subject
no subject
I'm going to echo the sentiment that others have expressed before me and say that I think a player cap would be a discouraging element. There's an air of exclusivity when the limitations become about the players rather than the characters, and it's something I would've been inclined to avoid, myself. As others have also said, I think tailoring has to strike a balance, and should if present be focused on the character pool most of all, because it's through the characters that we interact with the game's premise and events.
If I were to suggest any change it might be to increase the character cap by a margin, because it is a little low compared to other capped games I've seen. However, I'm of the mind that this is up to what will work best for mods' workload. I'd definitely rather keep the character cap as it is than limit new players joining the fray.
Pass/Fail
Personally, I liked this. I think it's a good way to have characters accounted for in a game that's mission-based and would ICly have focus on the results of their actions. As some have said before me, I thought not knowing/anticipating the requirements was better, because it doesn't push people to take specific actions. That being said, I agree with the suggestion that it be integrated into the AC form for the month rather than posted separately.
CYOA
I thought this was pretty fun to work with! Understandably I don't think it could be maintained in every mission, every step of the way, but I'd love to see this pop up more in the future. It gave me more ideas of things I could play with and respond to, and having an idea of the results that would follow made threading out developments pretty easy.
Plot
Having come in during the late-game stage of the Nalawi mission, I was glad to see something a little more lighthearted. I think the suggestion of smaller/lighter mini-missions in between heavier and possibly darker missions would be a good way to maintain some balance and supply variation in the missions our characters are assigned to. Mixing and matching lighter and heavier plots would really be nice, and there may be room for this variance within the span of longer missions going forward, which would keep some from feeling too bogged down.
All this said, I'm really grateful for everything the mod team has done so far and the willingness to get our opinions and feedback. The adjustments that have been made in my time here have all been really thoughtful and positive ones, and I find the game very well-run overall.
no subject
If we have to have a report card, I'd be more into the idea of something less... mandatory and specific on particular guidelines needed in order to pass. I guess... I don't know, maybe reporting in with threads any given player thinks would make a difference/impact the mission instead of making everyone fill out a report card could be considered? And the mods could judge on a case-by-case basis. Or something along those lines, if we're to continue having more generalized missions like Chantes/Nalawi. It works well enough for Zeta-12 because it was definitely a mission that focused more on individual choices rather than the entire team collectively (more or less) deciding what actions to take depending on how everyone icly felt that we've had before. But if we continue having more missions that are more like... basically every event we've had until this one, it just goes back to me feeling like there's suddenly a "right way" to play the game that you have to do when before we've usually had the freedom to make our own decisions without worrying about whether the mods think it's the right or wrong way to go about it in order to icly (and oocly??) be successful.
no subject
I did like how open things were for the logs this time! The way you gave us options to choose from in what actions our characters took dealing with these situations. I'd love to see more of this! Though I'm less sure how feasible that sort of thing might be for a longer and more intense mission as the full ones usually get. Tying into this is my agreement on enjoying a more lighter and shorter mission in the middle of the longer, more intense ones. Definitely, it's good to have a variety and sometimes challenge particular characters out of their comfort zones, as has been said! This one felt pretty good - not like it dragged on too long but it wasn't over too quick either? Or at least, I felt.
no subject
no subject
I understand the purpose of the choices and I think I understand why you'd add the deadlines, but I'm wondering if there wouldn't be better ways of going about it if you ever use a similar mechanic for choices in the future. I'm afraid I don't really have any suggestions for it, though, and it seems to have worked out well for a lot of the players and not everything is gonna be perfect for everyone in this kind of game. But those are my two cents, anyway.
no subject
I feel like there is no perfect way to go about this. I'm in favor of the idea of a player cap because it makes it so that people don't have to feel guilty about taking up a slot in the game with a new character that they're just beginning to dig into. I believe that trying to alleviate that feeling for the current playerbase isn't a bad idea. On the other hand, I can see how a player cap would seem to turn off players who are interested in applying to the game. I have only been in the game for a month, so I admit that I'm unaware of the turnover of players instead of characters, and whether or not it would trickle at the same rate (from what you said above, it looks like it would).
I suppose my alternative suggestion is asking if there is some way there can be a flexible character cap? Bump up to 90, but let the final 90 be second characters for people in game, or something like that. Only seven people (possibly eight now?) play more than one character, so a flexible character cap may be the ticket, leaving some leeway for people to app additional characters while the "soft cap" remains at eighty.
pass/fail mechanic
I assume that this will be clearer down the line as adjustments are made and the mod-tailored responses are handed out, but my biggest request is for it to be clearer what the IC impact is on the pass/fail mechanic and what it will mean for the characters themselves. OOCly, I don't mind filling it out and it helped me really get my thoughts together for how I played Keith as we went into the final log, but I do wonder if it would be better to utilize it as more of a bonus measure for players. Rather than making it AC-applicable, it can be applied somewhere else.
cyoa
I liked this stuff a lot! I especially liked that you made it clear what would involve the RNG, so that we were aware of it going into making the choices. I would like to see this incorporated into other missions, albeit maybe not as rigid and linear of a manner. I was in the game early on, and I treated the human or goblins alliances as a cyoa thing and everything played out according to these choices (though obviously I didn't remain until the end of that plot). Having that be involved in all the missions would be super cool.
plot
As a new/returning player, this plot was a great way of diving into the game and getting acclimated to the style of play and the characters involved in the game. I think if it had been any longer, I might have grown bored with it, but it was precisely the right length for everything involved.
My suggestion to maybe add stakes to other similar missions is to potentially utilize the interim missions to apply to later missions, or be places where the first leg of a mission is explored and maybe it's brought back later. I think that might give people a bit more to do without involving major decisions involving morality.
zeta-12
Admittedly, I've always loved the "egg baby" trope in fiction and in RP, so this was a really unique way of working with that trope and making it interesting for everyone involved. My only problem is that the ending was a little anti-climatic, but I think that's to be expected.
no subject
no subject
no subject
So, I'm going to be a bit of a minority here, but I'm actually not fond of neither, but I'm not going to get into that. Though, if I were to say something about the player cap, I kind of agree. I knew a few folks who were in app queue for quite some time, at least a little over a month. And I feel a few others have already said what I felt, especially
PLOT/PACE
I really did like this plot, but I am not going to lie, I found myself struggling a lot with this plot because of the pace. But this is our first short mission, so it was a lot of trial and error, here. Mind you, I work really long hours, I work 10-11 hour shifts, at least 50 days a week, so I'm going to have a bias here based on that. One reason why I like this game is that even with my vigorous work schedule, this game has always been good about having an even pace and everyone's been wonderful about backtagging and making things accommodating when you need more time. However, the deadlines and just the overall stretch of the plot really made me feel lost and I didn't know what to do. I did feel like this particular plot was a little too long for my liking. And with the deadlines and sometimes rigidness of it (again, this is how I feel), so yeah, pretty much what
PASS/FAIL
I have mixed feelings on this, but that's mostly because of my RL work load. While I know it's not reflective of AC, I can see where this being a great tool to keep track of accomplishments, however, it's a bit difficult to keep at this when you're already feeling lost with the mission and missing what's going on. It would be a lot easier to have this in the AC log, rather than in a separate form. My only wish is that this was something that was given to us earlier, instead of towards the end of the mission. I mean, I'm waiting to see how this pans out, but the fact it wasn't something given to us earlier in the mission and because some of us were having a hard time with the pace of the plot is why it makes me a little nervous. It's still early to tell, I'm usually about waiting to see how things end up before making an absolute conclusion. I feel like
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
But I think you hit the nail on the head with the fact that the report card makes sense in this context. I actually thought this was going to be a mod play to have someone crafty draw the grown-up squidges, because that would be the sort of thing I'd ask for to have all the choices compiled in one place.
There could be a middle ground. I feel that the first chunk of Nalawi was a little slow in figuring out WHY the recruits were there, and then the second half had a huge moral impact that didn't have enough time for characters to digest and talk about, leaving the final conflict cold, right? In this case there were a couple of 'right' ways to keep that world safe, and the objectives were met, but OOCly a lot of people were burnt out and ICly a nice chunk of characters were left split--and that kind of got hand-waved away!
If the report card was implemented into that kind of a mission, I think it could work if a few of the parameters were given earlier on in the mission, but I think that the features the mods are trying to implement there could be rolled into the task boards to give the latter oomph. Zeta-12's task boards were for IC rewards, which were alright and led to one good thread starter for me, but they weren't super impactful. If players could report in to a task board objective like scouting ahead or clearing a town square of zombies etc, and have that lead to whether that leg of the mission is a pass, a fail, or a third option that goes in a new direction... that seems sort of like what both task board and report card are attempting to do but which might not be all there yet.
It eases off of the idea of a final, right way to play the game that the characters might not have the skills or knowledge to make happen ICly (maybe!) and that can feel restrictive and administrative OOCly (at least for those of us doing a lot of admin stuff for our day jobs, WAP wap) while still incorporating elements of reporting on-task mission stuff for the mods so that they don't have to scroll through everything to keep up to date--or blithely rail-road onwards, though I realize the irony of that term with the upcoming mission....