Are there too many settlements (i.e., cities/communes) in Lusternia?

13

Comments

  • VersaleanVersalean Member Posts: 746 Mythical
    edited September 25
    I gotta say, most of the griefing I've experienced in IRE has had little to do with combat (I'd say PvP, but then somebody would get all pedantic, and who's got time?). Don't get me wrong, omniganks and theft are annoying, but so are cross-platform harassment, OOC slander, meta-elections, alt-outing, and racial abuse. I guess my point is that even when you take away their PVP shinies, the griefers will find other ways to express themselves.

    I think that there are definitely too many orgs in terms of sheer numbers (i.e., we don't have the critical mass for the number of orgs and factions), but I do certainly agree that the freedom to move away (or towards) certain individuals and ideals is awesome. I wonder if reducing the number of orgs and tossing rogues a li'l sum'n sum'n might iron out some of the kinks.
  • SaranSaran Member Posts: 1,687 Mythical
    Sylphas said:
    Chirbi said:
    Newbie retention is a huge piece to the problem of playerbase size, so what are some ideas to help with that?

    So far I've seen no to chopping orgs, no to melding orgs, and no to keeping all our orgs but having reanalyzing alliances. Which leaves me with the burning question: what is a good idea?

    edit: sorry for the massive edit, missed a post earlier in the discussion
    To some degree, I'm not sure that's a useful framing of the question. If we somehow magically turned Lusternia into a WoW-clone we might keep more people, but is it Lusternia at that point? I could see myself settling into a Lusternia with three orgs again, but I have the privilege of having joined one of the founding orgs in beta and not having moved since. At the same time, I'd be sad to see any of the three new orgs gone, because they're all pretty cool. Gutting the game, or radically redoing things, or otherwise shaking it up to that level risks losing some of the players we have in the hopes of getting new ones. That's a really risky proposition unless you're got some data that shows the ratio of those two is really good for the game.

    To be fair, pretty much all of the options at this point are more likely about retaining players rather than getting new ones. It's also worth noting that the choice to do nothing is in itself a choice one which we can see the impact of.
    image
    image
  • SaranSaran Member Posts: 1,687 Mythical
    Versalean said:
    I gotta say, most of the griefing I've experienced in IRE has had little to do with combat (I'd say PvP, but then somebody would get all pedantic, and who's got time?). Don't get me wrong, omniganks and theft are annoying, but so are cross-platform harassment, OOC slander, meta-elections, alt-outing, and racial abuse. I guess my point is that even when you take away their PVP shinies, the griefers will find other ways to express themselves.

    I think that there are definitely too many orgs in terms of sheer numbers (i.e., we don't have the critical mass for the number of orgs and factions), but I do certainly agree that the freedom to move away (or towards) certain individuals and ideals is awesome. I wonder if reducing the number of orgs and tossing rogues a li'l sum'n sum'n might iron out some of the kinks.
    Missed this one earlier.

    Reading the second part, I keep coming to the idea of some kind of minor-org, (similar to Scatterhome maybe but specifically designed to be less than the other orgs rather than on the same level). Probably won't work, but here it is.



    As a rogue perhaps you can just join this minor-org (the compact? maybe) which maybe has a few sub-orgs (hamlets for ease, but minor-guilds effectively) that are reflective of different rp hooks?

    Because it's intended for rogues, most leadership and competitive functions could be turned off, but maybe they have some way to tap power so they can use any skill?

    Work things out so that they can have some scrolls, let them submit books and plays but not benefit from them.
    Set up some private areas in the hamlets but they can't really do stuff to them.
    Enable them to be mercs for other orgs in Org v Org conflict.
    Have a minimal limitation on shifting hamlets, like once per rl day/week or something.

    Orgs should ultimately be better, they have full access to everything in the game. But maybe the hamlets could help account for stuff like... if Hallifax went and people wanted a "Science!" place, then a hamlet could be set up in a lab. If Serenwilde went, you might see Hifarae and Snow valley hamlets. Maybe with some warning flags letting people know what they'd be signing up for if they went there.
    image
    image
  • YehnYehn Member Posts: 282 Master
    Enable them to be mercs for other orgs in Org v Org conflict. 
    Not sure enemy statuses would allow that. You'd more than likely just end up with alliances... again...





    beep
  • SaranSaran Member Posts: 1,687 Mythical
    Yehn said:
    Enable them to be mercs for other orgs in Org v Org conflict. 
    Not sure enemy statuses would allow that. You'd more than likely just end up with alliances... again...





    For enemy statuses, that comes down to the player. If someone in the compact builds a reputation that earns them a lasting enemy status with any org then that's their fault and it limits their options.
    On the other hand, someone who's useful for the right incentive could find they have a lot of freedom, and even if they get an enemy status during a raid they're helping with, they might also lose it pretty quickly.

    For the other, Alliances are typically enforced by the leaders who have power over the players in their org. As people wouldn't have this power in that setup they wouldn't really be able to enforce an alliance.
    image
    image
  • YehnYehn Member Posts: 282 Master
    Saran said:
    Yehn said:
    Enable them to be mercs for other orgs in Org v Org conflict. 
    Not sure enemy statuses would allow that. You'd more than likely just end up with alliances... again...





    On the other hand, someone who's useful for the right incentive could find they have a lot of freedom, and even if they get an enemy status during a raid they're helping with, they might also lose it pretty quickly.
    Doubtful... help in a raid, you'd be enemied for... at least 2 IG years, generally. And that's if the org is willing to remove it at all... and after a few times, even the more diplomatic orgs would probably make the status stick...
    beep
  • SaranSaran Member Posts: 1,687 Mythical
    edited September 27
    Yehn said:
    Saran said:
    Yehn said:
    Enable them to be mercs for other orgs in Org v Org conflict. 
    Not sure enemy statuses would allow that. You'd more than likely just end up with alliances... again...





    On the other hand, someone who's useful for the right incentive could find they have a lot of freedom, and even if they get an enemy status during a raid they're helping with, they might also lose it pretty quickly.
    Doubtful... help in a raid, you'd be enemied for... at least 2 IG years, generally. And that's if the org is willing to remove it at all... and after a few times, even the more diplomatic orgs would probably make the status stick...
    From experience, the reason such enemy statuses remain is simply that there's little point removing it while the individual is a member of an enemy org.
    I've been in various discussions about this over the years and it's pretty brought up every time such an enemy status is considered.


    The other relevant example is when an ally gets themselves enemied, which has happened in the past few years. If they're needed for a fight, they pretty much immediately get amnesty for the next ig month the only reason they might not be is that no one is able to.
    Same thing can and has actually happened with people in enemy orgs, when the org in question has needed that extra help and couldn't get it else where.


    EDIT: also, if the game went down this road, maybe the mercs have a mechanical method for offering their services and the org can set up a reward that's delivered when done. Maybe with some way to track the reputation of either side, though you'd likely find this would happen regardless.
    image
    image
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 5,781 Transcendent
    If a mercenary raids Glomdoring and kills a fae/daughter/whatever they are going to be enemied and their mercenary villa or enclave or hamlet whatever it is they have is probably going to be raided, too.  Not entirely sure why you're so into this idea, but I'm not really seeing it being all that feasible.  Lusternia isn't a huge world with limited travel options allowing a mercenary company to easily move out of range of the powers that they have aggravated.

    (If you try to address the raid-thing, then you end up with a situation where people can move to it and grief / harass / whatever they want to their heart's content without any consequences whatsoever)
    image
  • SaranSaran Member Posts: 1,687 Mythical
    @xenthos Literally just throwing an idea out to see if maybe it could work for the people that are saying they'd leave the game if their org got deleted.


    Of course, considering the poll is leaning towards yes, what would your solution be?
    image
    image
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 5,781 Transcendent
    My "solution" is far simpler: Leave things the way they are unless the administration says they are considering a change and wants input.  They are very unlikely to overhaul organizations based on a forum straw poll (especially when "leaning toward" appears to be a 2-vote margin at the moment-- it's not exactly a commanding lead).
    image
  • VersaleanVersalean Member Posts: 746 Mythical
    edited September 28
    I'm more interested about the 'true' minority: Undecideds. I wonder if that's because the question is badly worded or because they are genuinely unsure as to the answer.

    But Xenpai is right, by any reasonable standard, the vote is tied between the Yes and No camp. Mighty familiar...
    Post edited by Versalean on
  • YehnYehn Member Posts: 282 Master
    Saran said:
    @xenthos Literally just throwing an idea out to see if maybe it could work for the people that are saying they'd leave the game if their org got deleted.


    Of course, considering the poll is leaning towards yes, what would your solution be?

    To go back to one of the earliest posts... Lusternia is a game of long term consequences and I couldn't see merc'ing working unless Lusternia changed in a fundamental way to do away with that (For example, spinning off all meaningful pvp conflict to instances, 1 org vs 1 org... which is exactly how the only game I've seen pull off mercenaries did it). I think that idea would be good for enabling "rogue" types... but wouldn't do away with long term relationships, friendly or not...

    All in all though, I'm still right there with Xenthos. If Lusternia went back to launch state with only Seren, Celest, and Mag as the available orgs... well that sounds terribly unappealing...
    beep
  • EssEss Member Posts: 147 Capable
    Yehn said:
    . If Lusternia went back to launch state with only Seren, Celest, and Mag as the available orgs... well that sounds terribly unappealing...
    Were there more or less players in those halcyon days?
  • OrventaOrventa Member Posts: 583 Mythical
    edited September 28
    Ess said:
    Yehn said:
    . If Lusternia went back to launch state with only Seren, Celest, and Mag as the available orgs... well that sounds terribly unappealing...
    Were there more or less players in those halcyon days?
    More, perhaps, as it was shiny and newly launched. The thing is, during those halcyon days, MUDs (though niche) in general were still going very strong and were more numerous (early 2000's). It was just as EQ was launched, and WoW was also new. Some 'Graphical MUDs' (a la Runescape) evolved into MMORPGs, and then we're here today.


    I'm a consent-based roleplayer! Kindly ask first, and I will return the favour. Open to developing tinyplots.
    Atlantis is my client of choice! (Guide)
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 5,781 Transcendent
    EQ was a fair bit before Lusternia-- I had endgamed and burned out during the fly-me-to-the-moonphase (left shortly before PoP) and was looking for something new to do.  My smallish crew of people kicked around trying out various things for a year or two, eventually checking out Lusternia a couple months after its launch.

    There were a lot of people in the same boat as me at the time, trying out various options and scattering across the platforms.  Today things have become far more consolidated as far as the "big players" go and niche things have become more so.
    image
  • AnitaAnita Member Posts: 583 Mythical

    I voted as an undecided because I think both
    But I am leaning more toward 'No' after more thought. we have orgs that the people who live there are only playing this game because of these orgs. If we're to get rid of one or more orgs, we'd possibly be losing more than just an org, but actual players and possibly those that are spending their RL monies on promotions. They'd be losing from a money aspect, they'd be losing numbers, they'd be losing people that might mention Lusternia somewhere thus bringing curious new people to the game. 
  • SaranSaran Member Posts: 1,687 Mythical
    edited September 29
    Orventa said:
    Ess said:
    Yehn said:
    . If Lusternia went back to launch state with only Seren, Celest, and Mag as the available orgs... well that sounds terribly unappealing...
    Were there more or less players in those halcyon days?
    More, perhaps, as it was shiny and newly launched. The thing is, during those halcyon days, MUDs (though niche) in general were still going very strong and were more numerous (early 2000's). It was just as EQ was launched, and WoW was also new. Some 'Graphical MUDs' (a la Runescape) evolved into MMORPGs, and then we're here today.
    Could even be the same as right now to be fair, like right now that'd mean an average of 16.3 players logged in for each org and in theory 5.4 in each guild.
    Which in turn meant more people to catch and retain novices in orgs.

    The other thing that could have inflated numbers in the early days is the "shiny new stuff" hope.

    There were clans for pretty much every closed org (except maybe jojobo) full of people waiting for them to open.
    New skills were being released pretty regularly.
    Manses turn up, then we can turn them into ships (and Ialie becomes the greatest player killer ever moments later >_>). Omg, we just got two new races added to the mix.

    Shortly after halli/gaudi released (which was like... 7-8 years ago now maybe?) it kinda slowed down with the releases of their classes being stretched out.

    As time goes on, you start maxing out on stuff. There's only so many functional trades you can make, Every new skill is more stuff to break the game (or be useless).

    The new orgs/guilds split the population (they brought more people in, of course.) and also added more skills that were needed. Which can transition into disappointment when things don't come out, like the people that were hoping for Ackleberry to be released. (The final archetype was first teased like... 7+ years ago)

    We'd probably see a spike in players when halli/gaudi monks are released along with the final archetype because new, plus some older players may come back to experience that but it'd likely drop off again.



    MMOs tend to avoid this through regular expacs and content patching. They're theme parks though, so giving everyone new dungeons and better equipment opportunities every couple of months is simpler than it is here.

    -------------------

    Also, while @Celina is correct in that a better PK environment will attract more PKers. It seems like the sort of thing surveys (of current and former players, even the MUDs reddit) could answer, see what would interest people, ask why people are leaving/have left.

    Like, maybe PK will help retention, maybe it'll just make the complaints flood back in, but if it shows a large number of the people who have left had a different reason for doing so, then maybe their complaint could be worked on.
    Post edited by Saran on
    image
    image
  • YarithYarith Member Posts: 957 Fabled
    That's because your average pker doesn't complain about every mechanic outside of skillsets.
    == Professional Girl Gamer == 
    Yes I play games
    Yes I'm a girl
    get over it
  • SaranSaran Member Posts: 1,687 Mythical
    Yarith said:
    That's because your average pker doesn't complain about every mechanic outside of skillsets.
    Most of the PK complaints I remember were about how things were bad and needed to be changed.

    Shrug
    image
    image
  • AnaklusmosAnaklusmos Member Posts: 79 Capable
    I personally left because of the high cost to be more than just a web bot in PK. And the even higher cost to be notably good. With the addition of things like curios, the wondercrystal items, etc., the bar for combat has risen so high (it's not visible when you're already established, but starting out, it's a cliff).

    Put it next to Achaea or even Imperian, where I could literally become fairly formidable without investing a lot of time or money (albeit requiring certain 'budget-friendly classes'), there's no comparison.
  • SiddSidd Member Posts: 202 Capable
    I personally left because of the high cost to be more than just a web bot in PK. And the even higher cost to be notably good. With the addition of things like curios, the wondercrystal items, etc., the bar for combat has risen so high (it's not visible when you're already established, but starting out, it's a cliff).

    Put it next to Achaea or even Imperian, where I could literally become fairly formidable without investing a lot of time or money (albeit requiring certain 'budget-friendly classes'), there's no comparison.
    Bard? You can be a huge contribution by just learning Music. How is that for 'budget-friendly'

    Most of that stuff is nice, but I don't think you need it to become 'notably good' which has always been a strong suit in Lusternia. 
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,441 Mythical
    Bard is one of them classes that does really good in pvp wtih minimal skills but to kill solo they really need the +5 magic damage artifact for 300 credits.

    If you can tank a bards dchord most bards cant really do much else after that.
  • CyndarinCyndarin used Flamethrower! It was super effective. Member Posts: 4,469 Transcendent
    edited October 2
    I personally left because of the high cost to be more than just a web bot in PK. And the even higher cost to be notably good. With the addition of things like curios, the wondercrystal items, etc., the bar for combat has risen so high (it's not visible when you're already established, but starting out, it's a cliff).

    Put it next to Achaea or even Imperian, where I could literally become fairly formidable without investing a lot of time or money (albeit requiring certain 'budget-friendly classes'), there's no comparison.
    100% inaccurate. I could pk at the high end without an artifact pile. Lusternia really only needs mid level survival artifacts to compete. If you couldn't compete, it was on you, not the artifacts.

    Even at a cursory glance, Lusternia's damage enhancement artifact provided 3 levels above the max for 3% each level. 9% for 300 credits, and typically you'll only need 1 or 2 of these runes. 

    Achaea is 1600 credits for 20%. In addition to stat altering artifacts (2500 for +3 int!) that Lusternia simply doesn't have. Higher cost and a higher ceiling.

    For the record, wonder items are a little out of control, but I only ever completed 1, still managed to stay in and around the higher end of PK. Oh and 1 curio with pk application.
    Post edited by Cyndarin on
    image
  • AnaklusmosAnaklusmos Member Posts: 79 Capable
    edited October 3
    Like you said, you need that 9% damage boost artifact here in Lusternia. In Achaea, though, I can just tritrans (or even just dual-trans) + Survival and be relatively formidable as a two-hander knight. Strength-spec, of course, but it's knight! No need for lots of con.

    Edit:

    Achaea was very artifact-heavy on the necessities years ago, but ever since a new head coder revamped a lot of the classes (and combat, in general), it's no longer the case. I encourage you to dip in and make a few alts in Achaea, and maybe mimic some of their combat design to improve Lusternia.
  • VersaleanVersalean Member Posts: 746 Mythical
    I think people frequently confuse two issues in these conversations:

    1) Is it possible to have a great deal of fun without investing any money in the game?
    2) If two equally-skilled players, one with artefacts and one without, have a duel, which of them will win? (This is totally argument ad absurdem but hopefully you'll see the point I'm trying to make)
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,441 Mythical
    Like you said, you need that 9% damage boost artifact here in Lusternia. In Achaea, though, I can just tritrans (or even just dual-trans) + Survival and be relatively formidable as a two-hander knight. Strength-spec, of course, but it's knight! No need for lots of con.

    Edit:

    Achaea was very artifact-heavy on the necessities years ago, but ever since a new head coder revamped a lot of the classes (and combat, in general), it's no longer the case. I encourage you to dip in and make a few alts in Achaea, and maybe mimic some of their combat design to improve Lusternia.
    You could be as effective offensively as a lusternian knight with one single trans skill and a few others at gifted/etc.

    I don't have the numbers on me right now but I worked it out for someone that a furrikin warrior or monk would only need about 30 dollars of credits/lessons to be up there killing folks solo and finding themselves tanky enough for group combat.

    It is pretty class dependant though 
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,441 Mythical
    For a pure budget on the super low end lust can work out much much cheaper than Aetolia/Achaea. You can get everything "needed" for super cheap.

    One thing that other ire folks sometimes don't get is that often tritransing your guild skills isn't the best way to be effective.
Sign In or Register to comment.