Best Of

Mboagn said:

Jason said:

This was the expected outcome and consequence from the admins failure at making correct decisions months ago. I honestly don't believe Lusternia is sustainable anymore and I believe it will slowly become obsolete. 

I disagree; the other option would just have switched the sides involved. The end result would have been the same: one side is stacked and the other is left to languish.

In fact, not all of the orgs on the 'losing side' are actually in a bad shape. Celest is remarkably active, as active (if not more so) than Serenwilde and Gaudiguch, even. And even Hallifax manages to regularly send in at least one person to contested quakes. If anything, the issues are largely plaguing just Glomdoring most perceptibly.

In any case, there is a real problem with how Lusternia approaches conflict mechanics. Losing is devastating - there's a reason why Hallifax and Gaudiguch have an OOC understanding not to kill each others' smobs. Gaudiguch even vetoed a Spheres raid because, in the end, both orgs lose out.

Villages are another manifestation of this: not having villages means you lose out on commodity production, which is a huge part of guild researches and  is essential for crafters.

Wildnodes have less of an impact because of the abundance of power, but the tendency of alliances to put all their eggs in one basket diminishes the potential of this system.

Aetherflares are the one conflict system that, I think, is on the better side. This is because, even without bubbles, orgs can access at least one construct through their nexuses. Winners win, but even losers don't lose too much.

There's a lot of fixes that can be made, of course, and I look forward to discussions between players and the admins on how best to address these issues.

P.S. One could argue that Lusternia (and MUDs, in general) had already become obsolete in the 90s. They're still around because they fill a niche need.

Personally don't think Lusternia is doomed either, I think it still got a future and it's not like the few issues we're seeing aren't fixable. Right now I think it's largely a  morale problem on Celest/Glom/Halli's side, which is a kind of downward spiral. No wins for long periods of time, less people feel inclined to even try, even less wins. To lose a large amount of your combat leaders over a single event isn't helping either. We're all in this together, yes?

Rohice said:

Hi, guys! Take my opinion with a grain of salt, because I don't have enough Lusternia experience to do much more than give my own limited experience here.

1) You have waaaay too many factions/orgs here for the population. Obviously, this spreads the players too thin. Org population is going to be low and badly lopsided.

2) Org changes in these games have always required entirely too much time and effort when you take into consideration that new experiences keep these games fresh. Players often thumb their noses at "org hoppers", when it should be encouraged. Changing up a character is much better than losing player due to frustration and boredom.

Kethaera said:

...In other words, you actually agree with my statement. You've contradicted yourself multiple times here. There is always emotion, and there is always a choice. My feeling angry doesn't automatically mean I have to to punch a hole in my wall. I have a choice about how to direct that anger, and often, how to reinterpret that emotion into something else -  like enthusiasm for a new project.

Kethaera said:

The issue is... that's just the reality of what happens?
Even in the past couple of months I've been told people apparently demanded the current halli/seren agreement on threat of them leaving if we didn't.
It's not healthy for the game and addressing this particular issue is behind certain... often side-lined Seren rp is a thing, but across generations of players the same thing keeps happening. Sometimes it's they've made friends and they don't want to go to war with them, sometimes they've started building up international families, orders could be a factor, etc.

It can also scale down to other kinds of drama that can still send players packing.

What is the reality of what happens? Nothing you're saying here seems directly related to what I've said. Is your argument "never cause drama?" Then I want a definition for what you think that means, because 

- Drama is a part of rp, and is sometimes admin-led
- Drama can also be caused by trying to prevent change
- People I know have accused you of causing it, too