Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

13567

Comments

  • MboagnMboagn Member Posts: 147 Master
    edited July 2020
    edt; this is in response to Synl's and Maligorn's posts about alliances and friendship

    Hehe yeah, like, I get that alliances are not about friendship, but you don't say it. It's like how you don't say that someone's baby is ugly.  :'(
    It's pronounced "Maggy'!

    Explorer (80%), Achiever (53%), Socializer (53%), Killer (13%)
    Bartle Taxonomy
    (test yourself)

  • EveEve Member Posts: 40 Apprentice
    edited July 2020
    Maligorn said:
    I just wanted to isolate this real quick. This attitude is how Glomdoring got into a 4v2 situation.
    Because we wished to speak with a City Leader about a couple of topics?  They refused and thus decided to call us tyrants? I'm not quite curious about which version of the story you were told. Perhaps we could speak IC about it sometime, that is.. if you wish and could prove to be worth the breath to Evette.

    Edit: Curio / curious, same same- yes? :P
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 7,034 Transcendent

    Orael said:
    I guess I misunderstood what you meant by back-end conversation Xenthos, I don't view our conversation with Parhelion or Ixion as 'back-end.'


    I think you're missing a big thing here, and I was very clear when I originally approached you that I felt that putting the decision on Ixion and Choros was a back-room situation:
    The win was not on either of them.
    Ascension as an event is not about the person being raised- it's about the entire team (which includes that person).  I am uniquely positioned to know this.  Choros said the same thing in a post here as well.  Choros was not the leader of our group- if anything, it was Aramel.  We were all focused around a common goal: Get Choros the staff, keep him alive, get everyone else dead.  It's a team goal, it's everyone pulling together to achieve something great, and the win is everyone's win.
    Yet you keep saying that asking us, the players who won the event, is unreasonable.  That's why it keeps being brought up; the event was ours, too.  We were every bit as invested in it, and its outcome, as the people who were asked.
    The reason that we don't feel you've been open and transparent is that you weren't.  We found out about it when you announced it as a Done Deal in an announce post.  There's also a great deal more information in this post here that wasn't provided before (more on that later).  I feel that putting that decision on just one player (the other was obviously going to say yes) is the unfair thing here.  That one player was part of a team.  The team won.  And then the post we got said this:
    "To this end, we have been in discussion with both Parhelion and Ixion regarding the matter. It has been agreed between us, and all parties, that the fairest thing to do is to raise Ixion as a True Ascendant in addition to Parhelion. We will hold an event this coming Saturday, 18th July, wherein he will receive this in an in-character manner.
    We hope that in conjunction with the work we are doing to reduce lag in the future, this will address the very valid concerns and feelings that were brought to us, as well as ensuring that the incredible amount of work that went into the contest is not wasted due to something out of everyone's control."
    You edited the first bolded bit in-game, which... thank you.  Still reads the same here on the forums, and yeah, that was a gut punch, because it pretty much just threw out everyone else's contributions and said they didn't matter.  Then it goes on to say that it hopes it addresses the very valid concerns (of one party)... but says nothing about the other end.  It comes across as entirely one-sided, seemingly a complete dismissal of any concerns that might be experienced by anyone else.  There is no reference in any manner of the following:
    "The decision process occurred as a conversation with the rest of the admin team, volunteers, etc. We discussed the pros and cons. Yes, it was brought up that players may feel like it was a slap in the face, that we were dismissing their efforts. Yes, some admin were worried that it would look like we were buying into complaints and it would just encourage people to complain more to get what they wanted. Some admin pointed out that giving Ixion TA doesn't actually solve the lag issue (which it doesn't, but we've addressed that as well).
    We considered just giving a 'present' of some sort to all the players as a way of apology, or even doing a re-do but we ultimately decided that anything short of our decision would just be considered another slap in the face by those that were already upset.
    We even consulted higher-ups in IRE to get their opinion on it."
    I really can't find any reference to this in the original post; this is the first time that information was actually provided to us that I can see, and that is a step towards being open / transparent.  Something I don't understand: why it was decided to just not address it at all?  I think that decision, more than anything else, is what has thrown us all for a loop and is what makes it feel so one-sided.
    It's taken a lot of thinking to get to that realization, and your reply / my ruminating on it has helped me get there, so thank you.  This is akin to what I was trying to get to with trying to attain buy-in statements earlier- just making us feel like we were actually part of the thought process would have helped, versus feeling like we were just being paved over and entirely ignored.
    I think if you focus on addressing that, maybe we can get somewhere here.  I guess it fundamentally comes down to the feeling that one party's concerns were rated as more valid than the other's.  One set of concerns got explicitly, publicly addressed, and the other... just wasn't.  Can you see how this comes across to us, from our standpoint?  You've now acknowledged that it was at least considered, but we still don't know anything more than that.  Nothing else was, to our knowledge, done to address our concerns, though they were raised before the decision was made.  We have exactly what we had before this announce post was written, but also all the feelings that came with the post which undermines the achievement of what we managed to pull off despite all expectations (by everyone).  Nobody thought we were going to win this thing.  The fact that it happened was incredible... and then we got hit with this post.
    * I have to acknowledge that you have addressed a post-announce concern, related to having talks to try to make it not feel "super special" / the actual winner - but I'm not sure how that gets pulled off?  Just the fact that it's happening separately seems like it makes it special.
    Anyways, I hope that helps clarify things for you.  It has for me, so at least something good came of writing it.
    image
  • MboagnMboagn Member Posts: 147 Master
    Players have personal motives and to put this decision on them is basically "who has more people to vote".
    It's pronounced "Maggy'!

    Explorer (80%), Achiever (53%), Socializer (53%), Killer (13%)
    Bartle Taxonomy
    (test yourself)

  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 7,034 Transcendent
    Mboagn said:
    Players have personal motives and to put this decision on them is basically "who has more people to vote".

    Any particular reason you're equating "asking for input" to "we're going to have players vote and abide by whatever the vote says"?
    image
  • MboagnMboagn Member Posts: 147 Master
    If there are more people who agree with a certain idea, then that idea has a better chance of being approved, whether or not it's the best idea with which to go.
    It's pronounced "Maggy'!

    Explorer (80%), Achiever (53%), Socializer (53%), Killer (13%)
    Bartle Taxonomy
    (test yourself)

  • AlexandriaAlexandria Member Posts: 409 Fabled
    Sorry for double post, though I should clarify: It's totally reasonable to not feel okay. I just don't think the way we are going about not being okay is within the bounds of reason at this point.

    Czixi, the Welkin murmurs, "Fight on, My Effervescent Sylph. I will be with you as you do."

    Aian Lerit'r, Lead Schematicist exclaims to you, "A *paperwork* emergency, Chairman!

  • TarkenTarken Member Posts: 50 Adept
    I've held off on posting because I admittedly needed to cool off a bit after the announcement. I'm not going to give my own thoughts here, as I think at this point it is a fairly circular argument. But I do want to pose one question which I think is the real cause of the pervasive frustration among our side of things after reading over discord etc.

    There is a very wide spread belief that if this had gone the other way, we would not be having this conversation. Some people will say that is because Ixion gets special treatment. I think that's nonsense, its an easy flag to wave and you can fit evidence to support it: its low hanging fruit. Ixion is a very capable player who works hard and his stats reflect that. The real reason people believe this is because we were expected to lose; we went into this 7 seals to 2 with a new group and very scant experience fighting alongside Hallifax for the vast majority of us.

    If the admin can honestly tell us that if Ixion had won and Choros had lost that Choros would still have been raised even though this was the expected result, I think that would put a lot of minds at ease among whatever they're calling the Glomdoring/Celest/Hallifax coalition now.

  • EneroEnero Member Posts: 12 Novice
    I do not believe I could express my opinions or concerns better than Xenthos already has - I support and can relate with the opinions he has voiced. I hope the concerns that were brought up will not fall on deaf ears and will be taken into consideration.

    Personally, I have no OOC issues with Choros and ICly, I quite enjoy the interactions we've had. What I do find an issue though, is the fact that this decision was made by speaking only with ~1/40th of each party that was involved. As if that was not bad enough, said ~1/40th of each "opposing" party, have known each other OOCly and been IC org-mates for at least 10 years. I do my best, to believe and accept that lines are being drawn and not crossed ICly, but in an OOC setting, behind closed doors? Am I really to believe it had nothing at all to do, with the outcome we have now?

    For me the current outcome is the same as if we had attempted and lost. In fact, it's actually worse than that. I might be making things up, but I imagine that for majority of Equinox the goal was not to make Choros TA, but to prevent the enemy alliance from getting one, regardless if it was Ixion, Uzriel, Malarious, or anyone else, really. New Celest's only Seal bearer removed himself from the competition, not because he wanted Choros to win. He did so due to tactical considerations and pretty much rallied the rest of the City to support his decision. Now everything he did, what we did, means nothing. Because it was decided that two ~1/40th represent everyone.

    I'll just finish off by saying I merely express my personal opinion, that should not be considered anything more than a data point in a data set. I do not seek to harm, hurt or belittle anyone, their decisions or opinions.
    Thank you.
  • JasonJason Member Posts: 7 Inept
    edited July 2020
    @Mboagn A metaphor I see it more as is a grand final of soccer or NFL, after all the preliminaries to get there, you have two teams remaining with two captains. Your captain may not be the Captain you want but he gives you the greatest chance of achieving the victory and standing proud, victorious, holding the trophy which is in this case someone on your side, the Captain, being ascended. What never happens is the opposing team also earning the trophy for the tournament and their Captain being ascended. The lag in this case could be considered injuries to your team, not allowing your team to play to the best of its ability. The main goal isn't to make others lose, it is to win the competition and earn the prize which in this situation was robbed from the winning team. I have never seen a competition in another game where the losing team also gained the first prize. Not to mention in this game, the winning prize is not just a trophy, but additional strength and powers.
  • EneroEnero Member Posts: 12 Novice
    Jolanthe said:
    Thing is, TAs don't necessarily stay put. In fact, one of the mainstay features of TA that really, truly separates them from the VA is their ability to move around to new orgs without losing their status. I can see this from the "strictly competitive" angle, but in the long-run of the game and from a roleplaying angle its just bad business. If Parhelion moved to, say, Gaudiguch in two months time, would that also devastate your sense of accomplishment?

    This is also not something limited to you - Serenwilde had TAs that hopped over to Glomdoring. These things happen. I think this sort of framing and attitude is just not a good approach for the event.

    Devastated? No. Not devastated now either. A little annoyed and upset? Yep. Would also be the case should they org hop too. That, I understand, is mostly due to the way I accept responsibilities and interpret loyalty. Presented with the option - org hop to an opposing org, after having been given 100% trust and effort from my allies, or go inactive/retire, if I'm no longer having fun, I'd chose the later, 11 times out of 10. That's beyond the point though.
    Mboagn said:
    Maybe it's because I'm on the younger end of the player spectrum, but this mentality of "My main goal is to make others lose" seems incredibly destructive.
    I don't think I can word this properly, but I think there is a little confusion in your statement. If you would replace "others" with "enemy", I'm sure you'll find that it's no longer "incredibly destructive", but instead it's "reasonably destructive". There are two alliances, at war with each other. While TA does not give an enormous advantage, it is still there. What exactly do you believe is wrong, with wanting to beat your enemy?

    I'll be happy to continue this discussion elsewhere, as I feel we're really off topic by now.
  • SynlSynl Member Posts: 222 Adept
    Stop conflating stuff that is perfectly reasonable IC with stuff that is ridiculous OOC. It is destructive to want your opponent to lose more than you want to win on an OOC level. On an IG level, of course you're going to want ruin and famine on your enemies. We ain't Raziela.
  • MboagnMboagn Member Posts: 147 Master
    The inquisition is swift, and I must defend myself. 
    It's pronounced "Maggy'!

    Explorer (80%), Achiever (53%), Socializer (53%), Killer (13%)
    Bartle Taxonomy
    (test yourself)

  • SynlSynl Member Posts: 222 Adept
    Well I don't know what you want me to say except that one person is nuts? I have way worse things to worry about OOC than someone else winning a game (esp. with no prize money). Depression ahoy!
  • MboagnMboagn Member Posts: 147 Master
    I guess what I want you to say is that there are people who are taking this destructive mindsey OOCly and that that is harmful to the game environment.
    It's pronounced "Maggy'!

    Explorer (80%), Achiever (53%), Socializer (53%), Killer (13%)
    Bartle Taxonomy
    (test yourself)

  • CitiniaCitinia Member Posts: 3 Inept
    First, let me say this - Ciaran, enjoy wherever it is that you go. While I have not had any interactions with you IG, I've heard nothing but good things about your kindness and levelheadedness. 

    For the rest of the posts being made here by players, some are showing a great amount of wisdom and calm. Others, however, are showing great amounts of toxicity. It is actually really saddening to me, as I've left MUDs for lesser levels of toxicity. Both sides are guilty of this, though mostly it was IHC salty before this post and Gloomtide guilty after, with some exceptions. 

    I have actually avoided Lusternia for days now, not feeling like the player-base is as a whole, something I would want to be around. I would suggest everyone who is angry takes a step back and practices some breathing exercises and figure out exactly why you're being like this, before infecting the world with bitterness that affects everyone, not just those you wish to direct your anger at.

    Now back to more ON TOPIC things at hand:

    To the administration -
    Some of us understand how difficult it can be to attempt to be fair when there is a world full of Karens and Richards waiting to knock you down. It is appreciated that you are doing all that you can to fix any perceived wrongs, while also preparing for what comes next. Thank you.

    All of the preparations and fixes that are now being done to limit the amount of lag during large events will ultimately be a Schrodinger's Box until tested. Knowing that they will help, but not knowing if they will help enough. I would like to make the suggestion that another large scale event, combat, or otherwise that would possibly bog down the Lusternia servers be attempted prior to the next Ascension. This would give you a chance to watch more in-depth the direct reactions of the server and lag prior to an event that clearly leads so many people to show their true Karen and Richard colors.

    Thank you for all of your hard work, and congratulations and thanks to everyone who put in all the work and planning of their Ascension teams.
This discussion has been closed.