Post by Tomina on Jan 4, 2018 18:02:39 GMT -5
I couldn't respond to Koma'a post on the locked activity check, so I'm posting my response in this thread.
I fully agree.with your responses to points one and two. Like I said, DBU does do a good job handling these for the most part. And it's good to see that things are getting a tune up to make things even easier for new members. Some people don't really read things all the way through sometimes for one reason or another. Not to single anyone out, but recently someone posted a new character app that didn’t follow the proper format. So anything to make things easier would be useful.
My Non-RoD thread suggestion was made before I realized you could apply the 48 hour rule to them too. People don't normally do that though, so I didn't know about it. So disregard most of my comments on that one. Being active in critical threads is always important though.
The third point is probably the hardest to talk about, since there's a lot of ambiguity that comes with it. Like I said, I do get that staff has to keep certain stuff hidden. The Saiyan thing was kinda talked about a lot and the changes weren’t super drastic, as you pointed out. Demons seem to be going through the most changes and even then it isn’t anything that would force people to do something drastic like retooling their backstory.
The one scenario I could possibly see this happening is if a nerd kinda makes a player not enjoy their character as much. Although none of the changes have (and likely will never be), drastic enough to make people do that. And if a drastic change was on the horizon, you would alert people to it.
The one recent decision that I think should have been more transparent was the one that reduced activity check gains, as I mentioned earlier. For the record, this change actually benefits me quite a bit.
If I had gotten 12k from the last two activity checks instead of 6k, Tomina would have entered the last tier of BMM already. Since the ToP participants are using the tike chamber later, this would have cut her gains significantly. Also since Tomina has all her Non-God transformations, her only a getting 6k a month instead of 12 isn’t that big of a deal.
For newer members though, it's going to make catching up to stronger members more difficult. Having a bigger gain meant that they could get to their transformations quicker. Strong people get more from it too, but as I pointed out, there comes a point where there isn't as much to shoot for. I know weaker characters have access to things like gravity machines and weights, but this still makes climbing the ladder harder for them.
I did say before that I don't have an issue with the conclusion itself. I personally don't agree with the change, but if it was something more openly discussed and everyone was fine with it, then I would accept that. My problem was how closed and rushed it was.
Being timely is one thing. But this change was pushed out so fast that activity change gains got halved when originally the November one was set up under the previous format. Members weren’t ry given a warning on something that would affect them in the long term until it actually happened. I think this was a slight blunder, since a lot was going on around the holidays. But I still think that particular decision should have been talked about a bit more before it happened.
Now for the schools. I can definitely tell that you guys are tackling them differently. Like Heizen and Chris, I had some issues with Cornatto’s school when he first posted it. The biggest one being instant transmission.
See from my point of view, if a technique is similar to another tech, then it should be about the same in terms of what it can do. The original IT was a BG tech that did the same thing as the IN Advanced Gateway. And it also transported people to other world and had functionality in battle. That BG tech was miles better then a similar IN tech in another school.
This time around though, there were staff that spoke out against it and insisted that it be changed before getting approved. And I really liked that. If that's going to be the new way of handling schools, then I have nothing to complain about.
It’s also encouraging that schools approved under the old system are going to be looked at as well. I certainly have my own thoughts on some already approved schools. I plan on talking about them after the ToP I'd over though. That along with other things has people busy, and since the ToP has a lot of MA schools involved in it, making changes now would be super hectic. It’s something worth coming back to though.
Now onto the big one again. Since the last time I went over RoDs, I have come to realize some things. Putting aside the fairness of it, being able to go back and forth between RoDs would be hard to implement. It would essentially be a more complicated version of how we handle side RoDs, and isn’t worth all that trouble. Also at this point I know for a fact that a one RoD per planet rule isn’t going to be put into place. So let's talk about things that are feasible.
I still think there should be a cap on how many RoDs can be active at once. So that people not interested will still have people to RP with, and to make things a bit less chaotic.
After debating between the two options, I think 3 should be the limit. It allows enough so that there can be situations that can be strategically taken advantage of (I.E. one group emptying their stronghold of their forces and another taking advantage and invading that stronghold).
At the same time, the buck has to stop somewhere. If someone strong who could travel to Makai was not in a RoD and had enough allies, they could have invaded Makai while Nakiya and her forces invaded Saiya, which was left open after Nasu invaded Earth to take advantage of Jarvis attacking.
Honestly that's just too hectic to have all that going on at once. Which is why 3 is a good limit in my opinion It’s enough to allow IC consequences while keeping things running smoothly.
Also this is one of those OOC changes that would be unnoticed IC. I was a member of the balancing team in addition to being an admin on addition yugioh site. There were certain cards we discouraged, and the game was constantly changing. So we had to keep making changes too.
Aside from the official Konami banlists, character IC didn't comment about the additions we made. Like when we discouraged Magispectres, characters didn't go “Oh that deck is too powerful”. Limiting the RoD numbers would be a silent change IC in the same way that was.
Ah yes, the Saiya RoD. This deserves another mention, since you brought up the other thing I wanted to talk about. That RoD in particular was a mess. Now while some circumstances were a little questionable (like Ash knowing about Saiya being practically undefended. Unless if I missed something I don't think she knew about Nasu’s invasion or the scope of IC), it really was just more unfortunate misery that the Saiyan race brought upon themselves.
However, I have talked with people who have accused others of metagaming. Now I’m not going to list any names specifically here, but that exact term was tossed around a few times in all the RoDs. Especially towards the Saiya one. Accusing people of metagaming is a very serious thing, regardless of whether or not that's actually happening or not. It means that how things played out gave some people enough precedence to believe that's what’s actually going on.
Maybe Chris did mention how Ash knew Saiya was vulnerable and it's just buried somewhere. The point is that there was a lack of clarity that made it vague whether or not Ash had the necessary IC info. For future RoDs, I think that how people know vital IC info should be made clear. That way the next time the phrase “metagaming’ shows up again (if ever), it will be much more clear as to whether or not that is what's going on.
I fully agree.with your responses to points one and two. Like I said, DBU does do a good job handling these for the most part. And it's good to see that things are getting a tune up to make things even easier for new members. Some people don't really read things all the way through sometimes for one reason or another. Not to single anyone out, but recently someone posted a new character app that didn’t follow the proper format. So anything to make things easier would be useful.
My Non-RoD thread suggestion was made before I realized you could apply the 48 hour rule to them too. People don't normally do that though, so I didn't know about it. So disregard most of my comments on that one. Being active in critical threads is always important though.
The third point is probably the hardest to talk about, since there's a lot of ambiguity that comes with it. Like I said, I do get that staff has to keep certain stuff hidden. The Saiyan thing was kinda talked about a lot and the changes weren’t super drastic, as you pointed out. Demons seem to be going through the most changes and even then it isn’t anything that would force people to do something drastic like retooling their backstory.
The one scenario I could possibly see this happening is if a nerd kinda makes a player not enjoy their character as much. Although none of the changes have (and likely will never be), drastic enough to make people do that. And if a drastic change was on the horizon, you would alert people to it.
The one recent decision that I think should have been more transparent was the one that reduced activity check gains, as I mentioned earlier. For the record, this change actually benefits me quite a bit.
If I had gotten 12k from the last two activity checks instead of 6k, Tomina would have entered the last tier of BMM already. Since the ToP participants are using the tike chamber later, this would have cut her gains significantly. Also since Tomina has all her Non-God transformations, her only a getting 6k a month instead of 12 isn’t that big of a deal.
For newer members though, it's going to make catching up to stronger members more difficult. Having a bigger gain meant that they could get to their transformations quicker. Strong people get more from it too, but as I pointed out, there comes a point where there isn't as much to shoot for. I know weaker characters have access to things like gravity machines and weights, but this still makes climbing the ladder harder for them.
I did say before that I don't have an issue with the conclusion itself. I personally don't agree with the change, but if it was something more openly discussed and everyone was fine with it, then I would accept that. My problem was how closed and rushed it was.
Being timely is one thing. But this change was pushed out so fast that activity change gains got halved when originally the November one was set up under the previous format. Members weren’t ry given a warning on something that would affect them in the long term until it actually happened. I think this was a slight blunder, since a lot was going on around the holidays. But I still think that particular decision should have been talked about a bit more before it happened.
Now for the schools. I can definitely tell that you guys are tackling them differently. Like Heizen and Chris, I had some issues with Cornatto’s school when he first posted it. The biggest one being instant transmission.
See from my point of view, if a technique is similar to another tech, then it should be about the same in terms of what it can do. The original IT was a BG tech that did the same thing as the IN Advanced Gateway. And it also transported people to other world and had functionality in battle. That BG tech was miles better then a similar IN tech in another school.
This time around though, there were staff that spoke out against it and insisted that it be changed before getting approved. And I really liked that. If that's going to be the new way of handling schools, then I have nothing to complain about.
It’s also encouraging that schools approved under the old system are going to be looked at as well. I certainly have my own thoughts on some already approved schools. I plan on talking about them after the ToP I'd over though. That along with other things has people busy, and since the ToP has a lot of MA schools involved in it, making changes now would be super hectic. It’s something worth coming back to though.
Now onto the big one again. Since the last time I went over RoDs, I have come to realize some things. Putting aside the fairness of it, being able to go back and forth between RoDs would be hard to implement. It would essentially be a more complicated version of how we handle side RoDs, and isn’t worth all that trouble. Also at this point I know for a fact that a one RoD per planet rule isn’t going to be put into place. So let's talk about things that are feasible.
I still think there should be a cap on how many RoDs can be active at once. So that people not interested will still have people to RP with, and to make things a bit less chaotic.
After debating between the two options, I think 3 should be the limit. It allows enough so that there can be situations that can be strategically taken advantage of (I.E. one group emptying their stronghold of their forces and another taking advantage and invading that stronghold).
At the same time, the buck has to stop somewhere. If someone strong who could travel to Makai was not in a RoD and had enough allies, they could have invaded Makai while Nakiya and her forces invaded Saiya, which was left open after Nasu invaded Earth to take advantage of Jarvis attacking.
Honestly that's just too hectic to have all that going on at once. Which is why 3 is a good limit in my opinion It’s enough to allow IC consequences while keeping things running smoothly.
Also this is one of those OOC changes that would be unnoticed IC. I was a member of the balancing team in addition to being an admin on addition yugioh site. There were certain cards we discouraged, and the game was constantly changing. So we had to keep making changes too.
Aside from the official Konami banlists, character IC didn't comment about the additions we made. Like when we discouraged Magispectres, characters didn't go “Oh that deck is too powerful”. Limiting the RoD numbers would be a silent change IC in the same way that was.
Ah yes, the Saiya RoD. This deserves another mention, since you brought up the other thing I wanted to talk about. That RoD in particular was a mess. Now while some circumstances were a little questionable (like Ash knowing about Saiya being practically undefended. Unless if I missed something I don't think she knew about Nasu’s invasion or the scope of IC), it really was just more unfortunate misery that the Saiyan race brought upon themselves.
However, I have talked with people who have accused others of metagaming. Now I’m not going to list any names specifically here, but that exact term was tossed around a few times in all the RoDs. Especially towards the Saiya one. Accusing people of metagaming is a very serious thing, regardless of whether or not that's actually happening or not. It means that how things played out gave some people enough precedence to believe that's what’s actually going on.
Maybe Chris did mention how Ash knew Saiya was vulnerable and it's just buried somewhere. The point is that there was a lack of clarity that made it vague whether or not Ash had the necessary IC info. For future RoDs, I think that how people know vital IC info should be made clear. That way the next time the phrase “metagaming’ shows up again (if ever), it will be much more clear as to whether or not that is what's going on.
