What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now?

[Jevedor]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

-The imperfection in the class system (likely not a popular stance on these forums). I don't believe every class should be balanced to individually take out powerful creatures or even be particularly effective on their own - to me, one of the best aspects of this game is that it is designed to encourage team play. A group of good friends is more powerful than any skill or bag full of magic items, and that's what first got me excited about Alliance and has kept me coming back all these years. I don't mind that some people are better in some situations (or even most) than others - it makes sense and just works for me.

and

High level players are powerful. They should be (and are) considerably more powerful than low level players. It just makes sense in a fantasy/heroic realm. I also firmly believe they should be targeted by all kinds of nasties, which might lead to anything from a hangnail to a Very Bad Day. That latter statement is not part of the rules, just a personal opinion.

I wanted to pull these out from Morganne's post because I REALLY strongly agree with this. I really like the class system and have been frustrated of late with a lot of the talk about how its balanced. But I like the way it is imbalanced in places, I think it makes it more realistic, and really emphasizes the need to work together. I also like the level gaps and how when you get to the high level game its recognizable. I am all for diversity and tinkering with the balance but I would hate to see the classes develop to a point where any one can handle any situation. Rock beats Scissors, Scissors beats Paper, Paper Beats Rock.. And thats how it should be.

 

[Polare]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

Something to note about this sort of discussion, and perhaps put a bit of perspective on why so many things are seen as "changes too big" to go through. Remember that those of us who comment on this board represent only a very small portion of the playerbase - a very vocal minority. There are perhaps 20 to 25 regular commenters on this board. That's less than the PC attendance at a single event at a single chapter for the vast majority of Alliance chapters. Out of hundreds and hundreds of players, for whatever reasons, only that tiny number is giving input on these boards.

Thus, while you might see discussions go on for pages about why a certain rule change might seem highly desirable, the change might never make it in - because the vast silent majority feels the current implementation is "good enough", at least enough so that they're not raising it as an issue. These boards are only one of a variety of means by which the owners get feedback.

I'm not trying to stifle comments here - far from it, I think many of them are very interesting and informative - but instead trying to make sure everyone keeps a realistic view on what expectations they should have based on these board discussions. If vast, sweeping changes are proposed and commented on fiercely, and don't seem to get much traction from the owners, keep the reasons in mind - you're not getting ignored, but you may be part of a much smaller minority than it would appear based on who participates on these boards.

Most Alliance players seem to be "satisfied enough" with the current system to keep playing and enjoying it. Everyone has their own things that they see as broken or a big problem - but in a system that tries to keep such a vast number of people entertained, very few things are agreed upon by a large proportion of the playerbase as a real "fix it now!" issue. Improvements are great, but almost no improvement is seen universally as a good thing by everyone - and there are far, far more people who talk in person to their marshals, chapter owners, etc. off of these boards about these changes than there are who comment through the boards.

-Bryan

 

[Jevedor]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

Something to note about this sort of discussion, and perhaps put a bit of perspective on why so many things are seen as "changes too big" to go through. Remember that those of us who comment on this board represent only a very small portion of the playerbase - a very vocal minority. There are perhaps 20 to 25 regular commenters on this board. That's less than the PC attendance at a single event at a single chapter for the vast majority of Alliance chapters. Out of hundreds and hundreds of players, for whatever reasons, only that tiny number is giving input on these boards.

Thus, while you might see discussions go on for pages about why a certain rule change might seem highly desirable, the change might never make it in - because the vast silent majority feels the current implementation is "good enough", at least enough so that they're not raising it as an issue. These boards are only one of a variety of means by which the owners get feedback.

I'm not trying to stifle comments here - far from it, I think many of them are very interesting and informative - but instead trying to make sure everyone keeps a realistic view on what expectations they should have based on these board discussions. If vast, sweeping changes are proposed and commented on fiercely, and don't seem to get much traction from the owners, keep the reasons in mind - you're not getting ignored, but you may be part of a much smaller minority than it would appear based on who participates on these boards.

Most Alliance players seem to be "satisfied enough" with the current system to keep playing and enjoying it. Everyone has their own things that they see as broken or a big problem - but in a system that tries to keep such a vast number of people entertained, very few things are agreed upon by a large proportion of the playerbase as a real "fix it now!" issue. Improvements are great, but almost no improvement is seen universally as a good thing by everyone - and there are far, far more people who talk in person to their marshals, chapter owners, etc. off of these boards about these changes than there are who comment through the boards.

-Bryan

Bryan,

You should sticky this to the top of every single thread on this board. Seriously. Not only is this worded extremely well it puts forth a point of view which is very easy to forget in the semi-anonymity of these boards.

thanks for helping us keep perspective. :thumbsup:

 

[RiddickDale]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

<whistles>

Just passing through folks... just passing through.

:thumbsup:

Stephen
National PR

 

[Vryan]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

Thank you, Steve.

 

[Talen]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

Something to note about this sort of discussion, and perhaps put a bit of perspective on why so many things are seen as "changes too big" to go through. Remember that those of us who comment on this board represent only a very small portion of the playerbase - a very vocal minority. There are perhaps 20 to 25 regular commenters on this board. That's less than the PC attendance at a single event at a single chapter for the vast majority of Alliance chapters. Out of hundreds and hundreds of players, for whatever reasons, only that tiny number is giving input on these boards.

Thus, while you might see discussions go on for pages about why a certain rule change might seem highly desirable, the change might never make it in - because the vast silent majority feels the current implementation is "good enough", at least enough so that they're not raising it as an issue. These boards are only one of a variety of means by which the owners get feedback.

I disagree, but only in part because it's apathy that is why so relative few posters end up on boards like this.

Every LARP I know has their board-posting types...and for every one, there's six to ten players that will never feel comfortable or even care that such a board exists. That is, they don't care enough or in some cases (in part due to comments like the above, that posting on a LARP's board is the flea shouting at the dog) don't believe comments really matter anyway.

And of course, there's the folks that don't comment and simply go away and play somewhere else. The folks that encounter your system and never, ever come back. And are incredibly hard to get feedback from, because they don't like/aren't comfortable with your game to begin with.

I've always told LARP organizers the best way to get feedback on your game is to have a few friends go play with your nearest competitors and just shoot the wind with the locals about why they think your game needs work or even "why it sucks" (though you know better, hopefully...). You may not like what you hear, but a good chunk of it is what you NEED to hear if you want more players and better rentention.

 

[RiddickDale]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

Talen,

I respectfully disagree.

The fact that a member of National Staff (and several Owners) are actively participating in discussions and reading the feedback implies that feedback here matters.

Bryan's message is that the ARC and the Owners have more sources of information/feedback than these message boards. During a rules revision period where we are preparing to make some changes every game played is a playtest of the current rules. 6-10 events x 13 chapters is a LOT of data being collected compared to 5-10 message board threads. Are either of them more/less vauable? No. They are both of critical importance.

The key is that those of us who DO use these boards cannot rile ourselves into a fever over the "need" for major changes. There is no value in that.

This IS, however, another avenue to build influence within the game by making your presense known to the powers that be. Respectful, well written and thoughtful posts can help a person spread their ideas and build support for them. This could potentially help get a proposal looked at more closely.

All avenues of feedback must be valued. This is but ONE of them.

Stephen
National PR

 

[Talen]

Re: What about our ruleset is actually good for our game now

Talen,

I respectfully disagree.

The fact that a member of National Staff (and several Owners) are actively participating in discussions and reading the feedback implies that feedback here matters.
All avenues of feedback must be valued. This is but ONE of them.

Stephen
National PR

You seem to have misread my post. I am saying that discussion boards are often seen as being a low-impact method of communication with the higher powers in a game, not that I find them to be so. After all, I post here!