Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems
-
@mietze said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
People are probably using modeling less not because of numbers but because of the insanely ugly nasty ooc behavior towards those players who were thought to be using it "too much" in "ways I can't/dont like.:
This.
-
@groth said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
@sunny said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
How is punishment going to make people use it more?
Explain to me how it's a punishment.
Making someone wear the same outfit for a week is a punishment. I don't even fathom how this is not obvious.
-
@mietze said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
Or out of fear that they are not doing it right because their skills are "too low/not good enough."
This is why I also dislike system discussions that are based on, like, a basis of "what is the absolute most efficient way to do this," because it quickly turns into "people are doing this wrong/not doing it well enough because they're doing it at less than peak efficiency." Which I don't mean as "people shouldn't crunch numbers if that's where their happiness lies" or "people should obfuscate their efficiency," but when we're talking about user engagement in a system and how to make it feel better, I think that a hyperfocus on "peak efficient way of utilizing a system" tends to actually have a negative effect on the discussion. It reduces the human element in favor of math and it gives the false impression that the math can predict how people will engage and how they'll feel about it. The math can predict a lot! Not denying that. But it very much loses the human element that is going to be the most common reaction.
-
Maybe we should get rid of the leaderboards since they seem to be used as a reason to be shitty to other people and to get resentful or think that if you don't have 6s in everything that you are useless
-
@mietze said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
Maybe we should get rid of the leaderboards since they seem to be used as a reason to be shitty to other people and to get resentful or think that if you don't have 6s in everything that you are useless
It's my understanding that they're going to be removed and replaced by something more abstract and descriptive.
-
My constructive suggestion:
The next time there is an official break from something game-wise for staff, let it be a break from code/system stuff. Players are gently told not to bring number complaints, whining +requests are triaged off to a 'TBD' queue, and bug requests are handled but the complainers not engaged with. Let it be a month-long story-only request so that those of us uninterested in code, numbers, min/maxing, etc. can have the forward momentum on our RP that we'd like to see when we engage with the game.
-
Knowing the math backend of a system is like knowing odds in poker. The odds for poker have been known for awhile now. There are books discussing it. There are a lot more books discussing poker strategy and human behaviour at the table and manipulating it. Knowing the most efficient means of engaging with a system is beneficial for everyone. The players engaging with it so everyone is aware of what is 'optimal'. It's beneficial for the staff (who probably knew it when they built it or shortly thereafter) if the best way to engage in a system isn't the primary method of engagement. Why isn't it? Should the numbers be shifted to make the player selected method of engagement better than the wonky mathematical way of engagement? I'm unsure how Groth views it but when I'm seeing a divergence from the 'optimal' method of doing something and the player method I'd like to close that optimal method and shift the benefits to the organic option.
-
@jeshin said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
Knowing the math backend of a system is like knowing odds in poker. The odds for poker have been known for awhile now. There are books discussing it. There are a lot more books discussing poker strategy and human behaviour at the table and manipulating it. Knowing the most efficient means of engaging with a system is beneficial for everyone.
Again, as I said in my post, I wasn't saying that people shouldn't dig into the (publicly-accessible) math if that's what makes them happy, or that they shouldn't share their findings if people ask for them. But, like, it was barely an hour ago that people were kind of saying, "Listen, I don't actually want to know all this mathematical detail because I'm not necessarily trying to be the most efficient." I'm saying that you shouldn't center these discussions on mathematical efficiency because a lot of players don't play that way. Yes, I do think the system should adjust to reward healthy ways of engaging in it, but I actually think you figure that out more by talking about how people experience and engage with the system. Like, I think @Apos's posts saying "there are more efficient ways of doing this, like XYZ, but people haven't been doing that, which is curious!" are helpful, because they're not so much centered on figuring out the efficiency as much as looking at how people engage with it.
And I think there are instances of ~EFFICIENCY~ being brought to bear in a way that actually reduces fun for other players. And, as @mietze said, encourages a mindset of "if I'm not engaging at peak efficiency with the systems, then I might as well not engage at all."
-
@roz said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
@mietze said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
Or out of fear that they are not doing it right because their skills are "too low/not good enough."
This is why I also dislike system discussions that are based on, like, a basis of "what is the absolute most efficient way to do this," because it quickly turns into "people are doing this wrong/not doing it well enough because they're doing it at less than peak efficiency." Which I don't mean as "people shouldn't crunch numbers if that's where their happiness lies" or "people should obfuscate their efficiency," but when we're talking about user engagement in a system and how to make it feel better, I think that a hyperfocus on "peak efficient way of utilizing a system" tends to actually have a negative effect on the discussion. It reduces the human element in favor of math and it gives the false impression that the math can predict how people will engage and how they'll feel about it. The math can predict a lot! Not denying that. But it very much loses the human element that is going to be the most common reaction.
I think it would help a lot as far as the constructiveness of the topic is concerned if people didn't take it as a personal insult when the math of the system is explained. Based on the fact I see statements upvoted that are trivially proven wrong by anyone with a minute to spare and the windows calculator, I can only conclude that people want to feel validated over their decisions more then they want to know how things work which isn't very helpful.
When I lay out the math for a system, it's not with the intention of telling anyone they're playing the game wrong, it's with the intent of allowing them to make informed decisions and provide the foundation I make conclusions from. If someone doesn't want to know how the systems work, then a systems discussion thread is probably not the best thread for them to be in, maybe we can make a no-spoilers version of the thread for people who don't want to know, or maybe I should start putting the math behind spoiler tags.
What is obvious to you may not be obvious to me and vice versa.
-
@mietze said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
Maybe we should get rid of the leaderboards since they seem to be used as a reason to be shitty to other people and to get resentful or think that if you don't have 6s in everything that you are useless
I plan to remove
scoreentirely and replace it withbuzzandlegendcommands which will break things down more organically.So
buzzmight show "Who's Being Talked About Right Now" and list things like "Joe, a celebrated fashion icon" or "Sara, a celebrated Champion" or "Fred, a well-known event host", using a value range (X to Y being 'celebrated', and so on) and the largest source of your recent fame. Fame would still decay, so people would fall off the list.Similarly,
legendwould show things like "Sara, hero of the Battle of Examplis" or whatever, or "Tommy, owner of the Blade of Destiny" or whatever, to break down why people are on the legend list. Legend won't decay, but will be much harder to gain.My hope is that by taking the overly-precise-seeming numbers out of the system entirely, it will let people focus on the end result and use it to spur RP, rather than everything else.
I'm also going to add a
nominatecommand so that people can nominate other players for manual adjustments over things staff might've missed, which hopefully will let people feel like the coded systems aren't the only avenues to gain prestige.@caryatid said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
Let it be a month-long story-only request so that those of us uninterested in code, numbers, min/maxing, etc. can have the forward momentum on our RP that we'd like to see when we engage with the game.
On a personal level, I was hoping to have magic and Shardhavens live by mid-February, and put some focus into storytelling using those systems; the prestige system does not interest me, on a personal level as a GM and as a system designer, nearly as much as those systems do. So I admit I'm a little sad we've sidelined into prestige being the Single Most Important Thing on the game; it was meant to just be a minigame people could participate in, and one that would make social characters valuable to their houses.
But it seems likely the prestige rework will save a lot of hard feelings and hopefully provide new outlets for a lot of folks, so it's not like it's a bad thing to put time into. And prestige systems will be more immediately accessible to people than magic and Shardhavens, so it'll probably affect more of the game more immediately.
a.k.a. Packetdancer (or "Pax" for short)
-
Serious question
Why not just remove the scoreboard thus obfuscating prestige during tuning? If the issue with prestige is purely competitiveness and not the knock on effects of mechanical benefits in other systems? If mechanical benefits in other systems is also an issue than just lower the existing softcap a bit like you did for modeling individual items and outfits (although that's a hard cap).
It seems odd that staff would halt the development of magic, possibly the most sought after system or shardhavens (automated dungeons) for the fine tuning of a system that will probably need to be retuned again if it links with magic and shardhavens in anyway?
-
@sparks
I can only speak for myself but the amount I care about prestige and the players who are loud about it is...comments that belong in the Hogpit about my fellow players. So oh well.I'd like it to be balanced and to not be tied particularly closely to House stuff like income, but am deeply...feelings about my fellow players that belong in the Hogpit...over work on it replacing fun story things.
-
It's kind of weird to see pretty much...all of Arx's staff continue with the "oh it's just a fun minigame haha!" thing, when Prestige is tied, in significant ways, to pretty much every manner of generating resources/silver/etc.
The other thing is...it doesn't even make "social characters" valuable or useful.
Being a social character doesn't matter.
The only thing that matters is "did you model this week?" That's not really....a 'social character' thing?
Every other method of gaining prestige is light years behind modelling.
You can be a social character all you want. If you're not modelling, you're not doing anything valuable for your house.
-
@sparks I think that uncoupling -- or reducing -- the connection between house prestige and house income would go a long way as a stopgap. I think that's a really huge area where it kind of comes down to people feeling a lot of pressure, and I think it's a really big area in which the "prestige is a minigame" intent can fail. (Then again, the potential pitfall of that is then it becomes -- what value is social stuff bringing the house at all to encourage houses to support their social PC projects?)
-
@tempest said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
It's kind of weird to see pretty much...all of Arx's staff continue with the "oh it's just a fun minigame haha!" thing, when Prestige is tied, in significant ways, to pretty much every manner of generating resources/silver/etc.
The other thing is...it doesn't even make "social characters" valuable or useful.
Being a social character doesn't matter.
The only thing that matters is "did you model this week?" That's not really....a 'social character' thing?
Every other method of gaining prestige is light years behind modelling.
You can be a social character all you want. If you're not modelling, you're not doing anything valuable for your house.
Clout is a ridiculously dominating factor in resource generation.
Who are generating your military resources? The social characters
Who are generating your economic resources? The social characters
Who are generating your social resources? The social characters.Saying social characters arn't doing anything valuable outside of modeling is a strange thing to say.
What is obvious to you may not be obvious to me and vice versa.
-
@jeshin said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
Why not just remove the scoreboard thus obfuscating prestige during tuning?
Because at this point the system seems irrevocably tainted by bitterness and general unhappiness, as people have worked themselves into a froth. Removing the scoreboards would not stop this; people would still be unhappy with the current system even if they no longer had numbers to point to. Gutting it and restarting with a system that implements all of prestige (fashion, tournaments, etc.) in an extensible manner to start with, rather than a foundation of one system (fashion) with others (tournaments, etc.) coming later seems like the best way to balance things out.
It seems odd that staff would halt the development of magic, possibly the most sought after system or shardhavens (automated dungeons)
Dealing with people arm-flailing about prestige is eating a not-insignificant amount of staff time at this point. People argue in the threads here, get more and more worked up, and then come to staff with (often contradictory) pages or @mails of "this is how I think prestige should be redesigned right now".
Hence, prestige got bumped up the list of things to deal with in order to reduce the staff workload in the longer term, so we can get back to story.
Conversely, magic is eating rather less staff time, because generally PCs don't have access to magic right now; people can try horrifically dangerous experiments through @action and eat up one of their GM slots, or try to attach themselves to one of the NPC teachers in advance of the magic system going in, but that's pretty much it at present.
As much as I'd really like to get into the stories of people learning magic and all—because that's where my interest as a GM really rests—it's something that can wait because the current state is not a drain on staff like the prestige system has become.
-
@groth said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
@tempest said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
It's kind of weird to see pretty much...all of Arx's staff continue with the "oh it's just a fun minigame haha!" thing, when Prestige is tied, in significant ways, to pretty much every manner of generating resources/silver/etc.
The other thing is...it doesn't even make "social characters" valuable or useful.
Being a social character doesn't matter.
The only thing that matters is "did you model this week?" That's not really....a 'social character' thing?
Every other method of gaining prestige is light years behind modelling.
You can be a social character all you want. If you're not modelling, you're not doing anything valuable for your house.
Clout is a ridiculously dominating factor in resource generation.
Who are generating your military resources? The social characters
Who are generating your economic resources? The social characters
Who are generating your social resources? The social characters.Saying social characters arn't doing anything valuable outside of modeling is a strange thing to say.
As far as I can tell, clout isn't doing a ton for you unless you have the prestige to go with it.
And modelling is the only way to get more than a pittance of prestige. (Invest around 500 resouces for 100k prestige or...go model for millions of prestige? Hm.)
-
A commoner with clout 20 and like 100,000 prestige which you can get by sneezing can generate 100s of resource per week. More prestige is better this is accurate but clout is the gold which makes the system run in a lot of ways.
-
If by "100s of resources" you mean...250 or so? Sure? Not sure that's very much. It doesn't feel like much. But maybe I'm clueless!
I have clout 23 and fluctuate between 200k-400k prestige generally, and with 5/5 in my work roll, I generate 250-350 resources if I spend all my weekly AP.
Maybe that's more than I realize.
-
@tempest said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
@groth said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
@tempest said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:
It's kind of weird to see pretty much...all of Arx's staff continue with the "oh it's just a fun minigame haha!" thing, when Prestige is tied, in significant ways, to pretty much every manner of generating resources/silver/etc.
The other thing is...it doesn't even make "social characters" valuable or useful.
Being a social character doesn't matter.
The only thing that matters is "did you model this week?" That's not really....a 'social character' thing?
Every other method of gaining prestige is light years behind modelling.
You can be a social character all you want. If you're not modelling, you're not doing anything valuable for your house.
Clout is a ridiculously dominating factor in resource generation.
Who are generating your military resources? The social characters
Who are generating your economic resources? The social characters
Who are generating your social resources? The social characters.Saying social characters arn't doing anything valuable outside of modeling is a strange thing to say.
As far as I can tell, clout isn't doing a ton for you unless you have the prestige to go with it.
And modelling is the only way to get more than a pittance of prestige. (Invest around 500 resouces for 100k prestige or...go model for millions of prestige? Hm.)
If you want to get an idea for how clout interacts with work, you can play with this spreadsheet, just keep in mind it's misleading because outfit value does not scale linearly with silver and I havn't bothered accounting for that yet.
***NSFW content***
click to show
