Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'survey'.
Found 1 result
Introduction Hola. Right, so it has most certainly been awhile since I have posted one of these up, and I can guarantee there is a reason for that. Roughly two weeks ago I posted up a community survey to gather some responses in regards to the Combat Default and how the player base felt on the matter. I received some very interesting responses, some were constructive and as one would expect, some were not very helpful in the least, but I gathered the useful information and have put this post together. This will be probably be the most controversial Conduct I have written, given the frequency of the topic and the results of the survey. But hey ho, let’s get into it. The Current Default For some time now, the Combat system on Lord of the Craft has been stationed as a Player-V-Player default. For the unaware, what this means is that once combat is engaged in roleplay, ie a Bandit attacks you, there was a failsafe feature should any arguments arise. The point of the Player-V-Player default was meant to be an end to a means, a feature people fell back on when no one could decide what to do. This would clear up issues and resolve any combatant scenario quickly and without ease. So what went wrong? I hear you ask. Well, that’s rather simple. PvP default became a predominant thing and as a way to garner loot, to pillage people of their items. This is not the way the system was intended to be used, though it has escalated beyond the point of resolve and has has reached critical mass. The System no longer works, and a new one needs to be made. I’ll quote something my dearest Matt stated on the matter of Player-V-Player default some time ago: "I feel it apt to repeat the fact that PvP default is not the method you should automatically be reverting to when fighting, it is a system designed to offer a failsafe if an RP fight goes sour, the situation is too cramped to offer a proper roleplay fighting environment or everyone agrees that PvP is the best solution. You should not be going out with the intention to “xddd pvp them all”, and if people carry on doing this they will be punished." Quote from Matt (iMattyz), Former Administrator and GM But this has been tried before! I hear you cry. My Answer? Well, yes. It has. But there has been a critical flaw in each observation and test conducted. When conducted, one default is favoured or chosen over the other. There have been instances of Player-V-Player default, and Roleplay default. Neither have worked and neither will continue to work. I’ll quote my good friend Sky here on the matter of Combat, I believe it holds some form of meaning to the current system and how people perceive it: "There is no such thing as the whole seperate entities known as 'RP' and 'PvP'. There is however the methods of conducting the combat, whether it be through emotes, mechanics or rolling. All of which is role-play, simple means to an ends." Quote from Sky (GoodOlBloke), Former Administrator What Sky means here, is that the currently perceived separate entities are truly closer than one would initially believe. I conducted the following survey to determine the truth behind the mutually agreed concept. The Survey If you don’t happen to be in the several skype chats I spammed the hell out of with this link, you’re free to take a look over the Survey here. I will not be taking any further responses at this point to control the data and prevent an influx, but you can understand the questions asked. One by one I will cover the major topics and share the results, incorporating the adequate information and consolidating it into a final juncture. http://goo.gl/forms/TsIAMLqufS Camaraderie in Player-V-Player I hoped this would turn out a decent result, though the responses were surprisingly very varied. I measured the data on a scale from One to Ten, and the votes were across the board. As described in the spoiler above, whilst the general consensus found importance in friendliness in Player-V-Player combat, (registering at 72.3% collectively from 6-10), there was still a larger number than originally believed who found little to no importance in playing the role of a Good-Sport during Player-V-Player engagements, (registering at 27.7% from 1-5). This was partially worrying, and the reason I’m writing and addressing the matter is to hopefully entice people to lean towards the higher numbers on the scale in their regards to Player-V-Player combat. Camaraderie and Sportsmanship is important in any area you find yourself engaged in. Though, given the 1/4th of people who believe Camaraderie means nothing, I find it prudent to state that something is obviously wrong with the system in place. While already addressed before on previous threads, I hope the consolidation of this information helps you in some means. Good Sportsmanship helps the game enjoyable for all involved, and as mentioned in my RP Conduct posts, everyone plays these games for different reasons. Some people play to act like a hero, to be a protagonist in their own story and some play to be the villain, the antagonist. Then there are those who play the Anti-Hero, and any other Archetypes you can think of. While irrelevant to this thread, it’s something to consider and take into account. Fairness of Player-V-Player Default Unsurprisingly, the responses were just as varied as the one above. This was to be expected, given the controversy surrounding the topic since the system started to shut down. Though, the responses were very varied. Honestly could not get more of a varied response, ultimately. There was an even amount of people who voted 1, 5 and 10. What this means, is that there was a diverse three way split between people being directly opposed, people being uncaring and middle grounded, and those who believed the PvP system was perfect in fairness. While players leaned down towards the lower end of the scale, the sheer split was intriguing to look over. Take a look: Fairness of Rolls Default Gonna just put a resounding “no” on this one, perhaps a “lol” for effort. The Rolls did not favour well, and the majority of people did as expected and voted a 1 on the scale. Surprisingly, however, there were a few who did indeed believe that Rolling was a fair’ish system, so I figured it was something to include and place in here. Rolling for combat is tricky, as any one person would expect. Firstly, while it would involve a Dungeons and Dragons type feel, the current rolling feature is not complex enough to incorporate into Combat Roleplay on the Server. There were some suggestions on the latter part of the survey in regards to coding an entirely separate rolling and RPG-esque turntable combat experience, however it was woefully blurred out by the other responses. Take a look at the results: Fairness of Roleplay Default This was most certainly the most interesting of the three, and the most unexpected. While, in the next section, it is clear the entertainment value of the current system is in majority support, this poll proved otherwise. The consensus from this resounded from high numbers from 5-10, with very few voting from 1-4. This poll was to measure the fairness of Roleplay Combat for all parties, it seemed to be proven that almost all participants voted to say that Roleplay Combat is the most fair for all individual parties in order to determine a winner of the scenario. I’ll let the numbers speak for themselves: Entertainment of the Current System [Accurate chart based on survey results] Likely one of the most intriguing and important sections of the survey, it found the majority of people are currently in enjoyment of the current system. A stunning 64.2% of the players who responded to the poll believe that the current Default situation is an enjoyable one. So what does this indicate? As stated above, the majority of people are split between the Player-V-Player and Roleplay Default for Combat. As shown in the pie chart above, the split, while favourable to support, still shows a whipping 35.8% of disagreement. This implies a 1/3rd of people find no fun in the current system, that it holds no enjoyment for them and, as found in the comments thereafter, it’s demotivational and they are worried to engage in any form of combat, purely due to the sudden switch from Roleplay to Player-V-Player. Preferred Combat Default [Accurate chart based on survey results] Now this is the juicy part, the part everyone has been waiting for. As indicated in the chart above, there is a majority of people in favour of a Roleplay Default system. 42.6% of people believe that Roleplay should be the default action people go back on unless all parties agree otherwise. With this said, 31.% of people voted in favour of Player-V-Player, 13% in favour of Rolls and 13% specified a separate suggestion which will be covered later. The playbase is essentially split on how to resolve this issue, and perhaps that is why the issue has shown no resolve since it’s implementation. So what does this mean? To put it simply, as I have stated above, and how people have stated before, the system is broken and currently only caters to roughly 1/3rd of the server. So what are the ‘other’ ones they have chosen? Mostly these consisted of “Majority Default”, so that everyone involved would collectively agree to a certain Default. Deduction Okay, you’re repeating yourself and just going over stuff everyone else has said, you nerd. So how do we actually fix this? Interesting question, I ask myself in hopes someone actually asked me that. Well Tahmas, here is the deduction from the survey proper and we’ll move on to the suggestions in a mere moment. The important parts to consider from the general survey is that, whilst many people hate the current system, there is almost a consistent 1/3rd of people who enjoy this. Posts such as “RP DEFAULT NAO” or “PVP DEFAULT SUCKS” will not change anything. As I have repeated and consistently stated to any conversation raised on any suggestive topic, “Nothing will change if you just complain, suggest alternatives which benefit the entire player base, not just your own clique.” Sound insulting? My bad, but I hope my message is conveyed. The Global Moderation Team and Server Staff as a whole already have a great deal to handle, and when players continuously complain about something that they don’t enjoy, but provide no helpful alternative, how can you expect anything to change? But I have provided alternatives! You scream to my earhole, and while that may be true, it seems that all suggestions or feedback posts regarding the topic of which I have seen, all favour or consider one over the other without much extensive research of information gathering. I hoped to fix that with that with this thread, because the suggestions gathered along with my own suggestion will be put forth for consideration. Proposal So, after reviewing the results of the survey and talking it over with some staff members, I finally came up with a general proposal and idea of change. I need to thank @sapphireh2o for the initial idea, which I then expanded on and spoke rather in depth on the matter with Global Moderation Lead, @Pandann, to which a healthy proposal came from the discussion. And here it is, enjoy. The Change It was decided and conceived that the change to be suggested must be a culmination of the two, and after the prompt from Sapphire, I believe we managed to come up with one. The decision landed on a matter of Instigation. Currently, the system stands that anyone can call Player-V-Player Default and no one can argue, in this instance, however, with this new suggestion, the Instigator holds no say over the ultimate decision. Consider the scenario with two parties, the Attacker and the Defender. The Attacker is a bandit and has come to attack and loot the Defenders items from him. Before, it would been resolved with a simple “/looc PvP Default?”, though in this instance the Attacker holds no say over the scenario at present. The Defender, however, holds the decision. The Defender may choose whether the combat to follow will take place in RP, PvP or Rolls. While I used the terms Attacker and Defender, I do not always mean it in a banditry sense. For instance, if you insult someone in a way that could possibly lead to conflict first, you are the instigator. If you break the law set in a servan province, you are the instigator. If you hit someone, you are the instigator. Steal from someone, you are the instigator. Guards can also be instigators if they attack or hassle someone without reasoning. If someone steals from you, they have instigated and you are considered the defender. If someone hits you, insults you to the point of conflict or does anything which could possibly lead to combat towards you first, then they have instigated and you are the defender. This means, you get to decide and choose how the combat will take place. Note, this is not to be abused. If an argument erupts before combat between “he instigated a fight” and “no i didn’t you did”, then the only course of action is to /modreq and get a GM to come and resolve the situation. Another note, any scenario would automatically escalate to Player-V-Player combat should the number exceed 5 or any negotiated number past that. Reasoning To put it simply, fairness. This is a fair scenario, and not only will it solve the majority of “LOL PVP 4 DEIS” people running around, it will allow new players who are simply getting started to not get chased away because someone wanted loot someone doesn’t have. I’ve known many people personally who have come to the server and are disinterested from playing purely due to the lingering threat of being ‘roflstomped’ by a fully armoured Cow-Lord. This incorporates everyone's suggestions and takes on board everyone's opinions. This caters to every diverse group, and allows transparency in scenarios. It also gives the GMs an easy task at moderating the scenario given it would all be played out through the logs. But this will annoy the PvPers! Well, unfortunately, yes it will. But what needs to be remembered is that this a Roleplaying Server, the capital Roleplaying Server if anything. Player-V-Player combat will not cease to exist, as I know many people will choose to use that type of combat to resolve a scenario. Note, this is still a default failsafe measure. This does not mean you can troll people by baiting them into fighting, because they can and will call a GM to resolve the issue. Added to that, it should still be a friendly discussion and you should always take the attackers views into account. If they want a Roleplay fight, and you’re not bothered, then Roleplay it. Take all aspects into consideration, but the choice is ultimately dependent on the Defender. TL;DR Survey did good, good data. People want Roleplay and Player-V-Player default over anything else, compromise made to incorporate both. Compromise: No official default, but the choice for the combat style rests on the defender of the combat scenario, the instigator no longer gets to decide. Please fill this out, it'll help register the feedback in regards to the thread. http://goo.gl/forms/I1ejvWMI5x