Jump to content
xxx

activity checks (___)ing (___) my (____)

do you like the way land is being given in 7.0?  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. do you like the way land is being given in 7.0?

    • yes, I like the way land is being distributed in 7.0
    • yes, but I am a GM and my opinion is not valid
    • no, I have concerns with how land is being distributed in 7.0


Recommended Posts

they freaking grind my gears!!

 

change my mind:

 

the entire competition for who can prove themselves to be “active” in 6.0 is destructive and pointless. for 90% of settlements activity does not transfer from map to map. the dominion was an inactive settlement at the end of axios; it rose to great power status in a few months. santegia was a world power in axios, its capital became a ghost town within weeks. during the transition from 3.0 to 4.0, oren and the dwarves held an iron grip over the two RP hubs on the server, all that activity went to a ******* tree in 4.0 

 

what I’m trying to get at is activity is fickle. even mighty marna, the most vigorous rp nation, the chad playerbase, couldn’t survive atlas. renatus and sutica, which were basically stillborn nations with zero players, are now the big boys in terms of activity. rp naturally gravitates toward spots that are close to spawn. so realistically, what you would do if you wanted to increase activity is scronch all of the plots inward so they’re closer to spawn – but wait, you didn’t do that. you put a completely unjustified cloud temple force field there instead. that’s okay, so long as there are direct roads to each nation capital and – oh wait, none of those, either? uhh... fast travels? no? 

 

but anyways, if the intention of this popularity contest was to build hype for 7.0, congratulations, you’ve done the polar opposite of that. you’ve somehow convinced players NOT to be excited for the new map. you’ve done the one thing we learned NOT to do back when we had nexus regions and that’s to threaten players with punishments if they stop playing lotc. it’s completely ******* dumbfounding

 

if you were actually planning on doing something sane, it would be better to give everyone who asks for a plot in 7.0 a plot, monitor THEIR activity, and destroy the plots that become inactive. but also create an eventline. something compelling that will actually ENCOURAGE players to log on for 7.0 instead of just beating their mineman characters for not doing it. send emails to veteran players who haven’t logged on in a while, telling them why they should rejoin lotc. put some of our talented community members together making something. I’ll keep banging this drum forever, lotc has almost limitless potential and an untapped niche as a open world sandbox roleplay. it is squandering that potential on an inane designed-by-committee **** measuring contest over who has the most active settlement that’s going to get destroyed anyway. please reconsider land in 7.0

Edited by xxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t signed into my forum account for a year or two but today I did just so I could tell you how much I agree with this man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removing fast travel killed roleplay. Like it or not sprinting an hour to some town is not what we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Taketheshot said:

Removing fast travel killed roleplay. Like it or not sprinting an hour to some town is not what we want.

 

people I tended to agree with said they killed road rp and immersion and made the map confusing to navigate. not sure if lotc without fast travels is much better than lotc with fast travels, though. lotc with rp hubs next to spawn is better I guess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some part of the idea behind the activity check system is to cull the excess of nations and settlements for the new map. The more semi-active settlements in a map at a given time, the more players will be spread out, and less centralized RP will occur.

 

I have my fair share of worries about the new system, and the nation plots in general. Ultimately, I think you have a valid point, but there’s also the fact that fewer nations = more centralized RP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hobolympic said:

I think some part of the idea behind the activity check system is to cull the excess of nations and settlements for the new map. The more semi-active settlements in a map at a given time, the more players will be spread out, and less centralized RP will occur.

 

I have my fair share of worries about the new system, and the nation plots in general. Ultimately, I think you have a valid point, but there’s also the fact that fewer nations = more centralized RP.

 

that hasn’t always worked out to be true, especially not with a charter system, like we have, that guarantees more nations are going to pop up

 

I’m all for aggressively culling inactive nations. I just think that decision should be made after the map change so people have a chance to establish themselves and we have a feel for how players actually spread out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, xxx said:

people I tended to agree with said they killed road rp and immersion and made the map confusing to navigate. not sure if lotc without fast travels is much better than lotc with fast travels, though. lotc with rp hubs next to spawn is better I guess

just say Athera homie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m a bit biased because I lead one of the Nations which has been granted land due to successful activity checks, but I’ll put in my two cents anyway; in the few months that we’ve existed we’ve worked quite hard at organizing RP and making the settlement community thrive, and when we were finally recognized by the WD team it was a big deal because it was a tangible accomplishment that will result in continued growth.

 

Basically my point is that there are people who have had their hard work rewarded by this system (Aegrothond, Agnarum, etc), and while I agree that the Orcs and Halflings SHOULD get land (Orcs for the staff corruption, Halflings for thematic reasons), the system has done at least some good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, _Jandy_ said:

just say Athera homie

 

I hated athera because of nexus regions but it’s wild how much nostalgia I have for it now. actually rping with people was nice

 

1 minute ago, Fid said:

I’m a bit biased because I lead one of the Nations which has been granted land due to successful activity checks, but I’ll put in my two cents anyway; in the few months that we’ve existed we’ve worked quite hard at organizing RP and making the settlement community thrive, and when we were finally recognized by the WD team it was a big deal because it was a tangible accomplishment that will result in continued growth.

 

Basically my point is that there are people who have had their hard work rewarded by this system (Aegrothond, Agnarum, etc), and while I agree that the Orcs and Halflings SHOULD get land (Orcs for the staff corruption, Halflings for thematic reasons), the system has done at least some good.

 

the dominion and its successor states wouldn’t exist if this system was applied during the transition from axios to atlas. all of the good things that happened to elf rp this map boil down to staff giving us the benefit of the doubt

Edited by xxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, xxx said:

the dominion and its successor states wouldn’t exist if this system was applied during the transition from axios to atlas. all of the good things that happened to elf rp this map boil down to staff giving us the benefit of the doubt

 

It should be noted that we made some organic IC choices in order to mend bridges around the turn of the map, which are what most directly resulted in the golden age- though the state of the Dominion in late Axios certainly didn’t engender faith. On the other hand, the original plan of the Elven Rebels in Axios was to build a fortress in freebuild so I think it’s a bit of a leap to say that Elven RP would have totally collapsed. It’s possible to build a nation within a few months if you know what you’re doing, even in Freebuild- there are a few nations that came about this way, which brings us back to your original point and reinforces it I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, the only real solution is to hard-cap the number of cities/towns/”locations”. Which means some people will not get plots. Which means some people will have to live together (lightning and crying crows). 

 

Or continue to have a largely empty map and somehow simultaneously small numbers of concentrated rp.

 

Considering the numbers of players, there shouldn’t be more than six towns/cities on the whole map and remove RP moderation like rebellions and wars. There should never be a city or town with no players in it during peak times. Ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The system is very flawed. Groups had to meet an average of 6% of server population to meet the grade. All groups, there was no subjectivity.

 

Oren, or whatever it is called, wants an empire. They get that by meeting the 6%.

 

Halflings want 1 tiny village. To get that, they need to meet the 6% also.

 

The entire activity check concept seems like an idea that is only still in the first draft of brain-storming. But they only got as far as that, then applied a half-baked, illogical system to everyone on the server without bothering to think about anything else.

 

On top of this, GMs have branded groups that did not meet the 6% as ‘inactive’. That word means dead, inert, practically non-existant. That mis-use of language then implies that those groups need to be culled for the new map. But they don’t consider that it is impossible to cull them. People play, and always will play, Halflings and Orcs. Refusing to give them land will not change that, and so they need to, in circumstances such as Orcs and Halflings, come up with a subjective approach that works.

Edited by Hobbs_Burrows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Hobbs_Burrows said:

GMs have branded groups that did not meet the 6% as ‘inactive’.

 

Admins not GMs – No other staff have any say on which groups get land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, zaezae said:

Frankly, the only real solution is to hard-cap the number of cities/towns/”locations”. Which means some people will not get plots. Which means some people will have to live together (lightning and crying crows). 

 

Or continue to have a largely empty map and somehow simultaneously small numbers of concentrated rp.

 

Considering the numbers of players, there shouldn’t be more than six towns/cities on the whole map and remove RP moderation like rebellions and wars. There should never be a city or town with no players in it during peak times. Ever.

Just add a limit to how many vassals a nation can have, stopping Human (and sometimes Dwarven) nations from spreading out everywhere and filling half of the map with inactive baronies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×