Looking for more active discussion? Join our Discord at https://discord.gg/x2s7fY6
Best Of
Rankings - recent changes
This is a bit of a vent, complaint, and hopefully some clarification:
01:51:50 ---[ OOC ANNOUNCEMENT ]-----------------------------( 2021/05/28
05:51:50 )---
01:51:50 I saw some of you guys talking about it and I've decide to remove
RANKINGS TOTAL MOUNTS. It encourages replica bloat which we don't need. RIP total
mounts rankings.
01:51:50 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
01:55:52 ---[ OOC ANNOUNCEMENT ]-----------------------------( 2021/05/28
05:55:52 )---
01:55:52 Total minipets has been dropped too.
01:55:52 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
While I understand this is biased because of my place in rankings. I also understand the bloat that it can/could cause, however it is a big hit to time, gold, and credits. If I remember correctly, I had almost 1002 mounts. I have 62 unique mounts, which means I spent a LOT of gold to establish the ranking. Around 4,700,000 gold if you subtract unique from total. The only reason I had those additional mounts was for that ranking, which makes them now worthless. This is the same for minipets. Those were by time questing, gold, and credits buying them off others.
If the resources were not there to have multiple items, why was it ever instituted as a ranking?
I issued myself, to get clarification specifically on total artifacts, relics, styles, and figures, and if those would go away:
"since both rankings were updated and removed for total mounts (which i spent a lot of gold on just to have it removed) and total minipets (once again a lot of gold, credits and time) pvp and pve deaths should also be removed from rankings. It is the same detriment that was applied in the logic for deathstats, when the names were removed from that. I only put myself in that ranking because it counts toward the ranking total. Remove those two as well please. Rewarding people for dying is a bad metric. How far will this continue, I don't want to work hard to get total styles, total figurines, total artifacts, and total relics if the same trend will continue."
This is a pretty snarky remark from the admin considering from "HELP ISSUES" : "A personal request for clarification or immortal assistance: It is OK to issue in order to ask a question, or to get clarification from an immortal. Just ISSUE ME . This is far better than shouting for an admin or divine."
Reply from admin:
"Issue 22100: No. There are more productive ways to express displeasure than wasting Administration's time in this manner."
So, is the answer a "no" to what? No to the other totals? No to removing pvp and pve death rankings? Clarification would be great.
I am guessing there is no recourse for all the wasted gold, etc. even though that value is way more than an individual high cost artifact. 780 credits just for the mounts, at the current credit rate. This is very similar to changing the use of an artifact, and giving out refunds. My preference would be to delete all those extra mounts and refund back the value, not sure how you quantify minipets though.
01:51:50 ---[ OOC ANNOUNCEMENT ]-----------------------------( 2021/05/28
05:51:50 )---
01:51:50 I saw some of you guys talking about it and I've decide to remove
RANKINGS TOTAL MOUNTS. It encourages replica bloat which we don't need. RIP total
mounts rankings.
01:51:50 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
01:55:52 ---[ OOC ANNOUNCEMENT ]-----------------------------( 2021/05/28
05:55:52 )---
01:55:52 Total minipets has been dropped too.
01:55:52 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
While I understand this is biased because of my place in rankings. I also understand the bloat that it can/could cause, however it is a big hit to time, gold, and credits. If I remember correctly, I had almost 1002 mounts. I have 62 unique mounts, which means I spent a LOT of gold to establish the ranking. Around 4,700,000 gold if you subtract unique from total. The only reason I had those additional mounts was for that ranking, which makes them now worthless. This is the same for minipets. Those were by time questing, gold, and credits buying them off others.
If the resources were not there to have multiple items, why was it ever instituted as a ranking?
I issued myself, to get clarification specifically on total artifacts, relics, styles, and figures, and if those would go away:
"since both rankings were updated and removed for total mounts (which i spent a lot of gold on just to have it removed) and total minipets (once again a lot of gold, credits and time) pvp and pve deaths should also be removed from rankings. It is the same detriment that was applied in the logic for deathstats, when the names were removed from that. I only put myself in that ranking because it counts toward the ranking total. Remove those two as well please. Rewarding people for dying is a bad metric. How far will this continue, I don't want to work hard to get total styles, total figurines, total artifacts, and total relics if the same trend will continue."
This is a pretty snarky remark from the admin considering from "HELP ISSUES" : "A personal request for clarification or immortal assistance: It is OK to issue in order to ask a question, or to get clarification from an immortal. Just ISSUE ME . This is far better than shouting for an admin or divine."
Reply from admin:
"Issue 22100: No. There are more productive ways to express displeasure than wasting Administration's time in this manner."
So, is the answer a "no" to what? No to the other totals? No to removing pvp and pve death rankings? Clarification would be great.
I am guessing there is no recourse for all the wasted gold, etc. even though that value is way more than an individual high cost artifact. 780 credits just for the mounts, at the current credit rate. This is very similar to changing the use of an artifact, and giving out refunds. My preference would be to delete all those extra mounts and refund back the value, not sure how you quantify minipets though.
Mazzion
14
Re: Delete Insight
If you're gonna be a smartass you should do it right!<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE MudletPackage> <MudletPackage version="1.001"> <AliasPackage> <Alias isActive="yes" isFolder="no"> <name>Think</name> <script>echo(matches[2])</script> <command></command> <packageName></packageName> <regex>^think (.*)$</regex> </Alias> </AliasPackage> </MudletPackage>copy the above and paste into the alias editor in Mudlet. yw
Alias pattern: ^f(?:think|\<|\>) (.+)
local thought = matches[2]
thought = thought:sub(1, 1):upper() .. thought:sub(2, -1)
if not thought:match("[\.\?\!\'\"\-]$") then
thought = thought .. "."
end
cecho("<ansi_light_black>You think to yourself:\n<ansi_cyan>" .. thought)
send("\n")
Lin
2
Re: Delete Insight
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE MudletPackage> <MudletPackage version="1.001"> <AliasPackage> <Alias isActive="yes" isFolder="no"> <name>Think</name> <script>echo(matches[2])</script> <command></command> <packageName></packageName> <regex>^think (.*)$</regex> </Alias> </AliasPackage> </MudletPackage>copy the above and paste into the alias editor in Mudlet. yw
Czcienn
0
Re: Delete Insight
All of that belies the fact that there are just as many people who don't want to be privy to having their minds/thoughts invaded by telepaths and having their thoughts heard compared to those who do.
Deceit is great and all, but that doesn't change the fact that you are still removing a subset of RP away from individuals who don't want to be listened in on, but still want to use the THINK command. If we REALLY want to get nitty gritty, you all wanted to spout on about consent with RP with darker themes, your character's thoughts are no different. If I don't want you hearing what Rhyot has to think, I should be able to hide them. No chance of failure, no deceit. Just 100% Rhyot's own thoughts.
You don't need a new command, you don't need a config. Make it an enchantment that must be worn. That way, if you -want- your thoughts to be heard by anyone OTHER than Celani, you simply need to remove that item.
Call it Mantra that while worn, all thoughts are hidden from view except by the most powerful of Divine.
Deceit is great and all, but that doesn't change the fact that you are still removing a subset of RP away from individuals who don't want to be listened in on, but still want to use the THINK command. If we REALLY want to get nitty gritty, you all wanted to spout on about consent with RP with darker themes, your character's thoughts are no different. If I don't want you hearing what Rhyot has to think, I should be able to hide them. No chance of failure, no deceit. Just 100% Rhyot's own thoughts.
You don't need a new command, you don't need a config. Make it an enchantment that must be worn. That way, if you -want- your thoughts to be heard by anyone OTHER than Celani, you simply need to remove that item.
Call it Mantra that while worn, all thoughts are hidden from view except by the most powerful of Divine.
Rhyot
0
Delete Insight
So the title of the discussion is direct, but the intention is to both make a suggestion and make an argument.
Insight can be a great tool for roleplay in many ways. It gives other players a great option to learn more about a character, create subversive plotlines, communicate in new ways, deepen bonds, develop characters - the list goes on.
However, on the other side, it also can make it far more difficult for subversive plotlines when EVERYONE is a telepath, to create stories with duplicity when EVERYONE is a telepath, to give some level of agency in possession, coercion, blackmail, or otherwise because, again, EVERYONE is a telepath.
Now, I know that is hyperbole, but enough established players have insight and have incorporated it into their character in some way that it is difficult to get away from the fact that at least one person around you can read thoughts. A recent ongoing RP plot has had me think on this, as I am struggling to consider ways in which my character can actively be duplicitous, if the story calls for it, as it is nearly impossible to say one thing but communicate/think another to the coercive agent without a player overhearing and immediately uncovering the plot.
Even if insight is not deleted, I do think it may be worth it to consider limiting it as it has the distinct possibility of hampering roleplay that encourages a character to do things they may not otherwise do because of outside influences. Intrigue makes things more interesting, and unfortunately, with thoughts so easily overheard intrigue is less able to be fostered as there are no 'private' methods of communication really out there outside of tells, and unfortunately tells are not necessarily an option all the time.
Thoughts? Opinions? Derails?
Edit: I will add in that I have used insight before, myself, to 'hear' thoughts on Saidenn and cited various reasons why. I am now wondering if that was in the best interest of the plot at the time, as well.
Insight can be a great tool for roleplay in many ways. It gives other players a great option to learn more about a character, create subversive plotlines, communicate in new ways, deepen bonds, develop characters - the list goes on.
However, on the other side, it also can make it far more difficult for subversive plotlines when EVERYONE is a telepath, to create stories with duplicity when EVERYONE is a telepath, to give some level of agency in possession, coercion, blackmail, or otherwise because, again, EVERYONE is a telepath.
Now, I know that is hyperbole, but enough established players have insight and have incorporated it into their character in some way that it is difficult to get away from the fact that at least one person around you can read thoughts. A recent ongoing RP plot has had me think on this, as I am struggling to consider ways in which my character can actively be duplicitous, if the story calls for it, as it is nearly impossible to say one thing but communicate/think another to the coercive agent without a player overhearing and immediately uncovering the plot.
Even if insight is not deleted, I do think it may be worth it to consider limiting it as it has the distinct possibility of hampering roleplay that encourages a character to do things they may not otherwise do because of outside influences. Intrigue makes things more interesting, and unfortunately, with thoughts so easily overheard intrigue is less able to be fostered as there are no 'private' methods of communication really out there outside of tells, and unfortunately tells are not necessarily an option all the time.
Thoughts? Opinions? Derails?
Edit: I will add in that I have used insight before, myself, to 'hear' thoughts on Saidenn and cited various reasons why. I am now wondering if that was in the best interest of the plot at the time, as well.
Saidenn
6
Re: Mildly Irritating: Aetolia's Pet Peeves
Yo, nobody actually targeted Didi on purpose until she started attacking people. I get that she's a positive and friendly person to be around, but that doesn't mean we should just take it if she starts to get involved in the actual fighting. If she doesn't want to be involved in the fighting, the easiest way is for her to approach one of us and let us know that she's happy to just chill in lessers like she had been doing until very recently and that would be the end of it.
But we all know this furor isn't really about Didi, so let's just pull off the veil and stop using her in your attempts at trying to guilt trip the "good guys".
But we all know this furor isn't really about Didi, so let's just pull off the veil and stop using her in your attempts at trying to guilt trip the "good guys".
Czcienn
0
Re: Mildly Irritating: Aetolia's Pet Peeves
I stumbled into the game during some of this ruckus, and was told that Didi, a spirit player, had run into a Major area yelling 'I'm just here for the elds" or some such, only to be targeted, and blocked in so she couldn't leave even if she tried. I really don't see how spirit can justify targeting her in that situation. I was also told that she had been chased down at one point after managing to leave, which definitely doesn't seem to be in line with what people in this thread have said.
The number of times I, a shadow aligned, have been allowed in for just a milestone or quick thing during a major sort of makes me feel like people are just wanting to be unicorns because it's allowed.
I don't know Didi's player. I've interacted with Didi ICly now and then, and often see and hear about what she's done. Most often she gives things to people to make them happy or stronger, just because she can, and it doesn't matter which side they are on. If you haven't experienced her ICly, I recommend giving her a chance. I know people often use what they see on forums as an excuse to stumble into people ICly, so try that instead of claiming ignorance on an IC level.
The number of times I, a shadow aligned, have been allowed in for just a milestone or quick thing during a major sort of makes me feel like people are just wanting to be unicorns because it's allowed.
I don't know Didi's player. I've interacted with Didi ICly now and then, and often see and hear about what she's done. Most often she gives things to people to make them happy or stronger, just because she can, and it doesn't matter which side they are on. If you haven't experienced her ICly, I recommend giving her a chance. I know people often use what they see on forums as an excuse to stumble into people ICly, so try that instead of claiming ignorance on an IC level.
Teani
3
Re: Mildly Irritating: Aetolia's Pet Peeves
Having aura does not give an automatic IC reason to kill someone. We sit in groups with our own tether in aura. We can turn on each other at a moment's notice. But we don't because it's not IC for us to attack a member of our own tether. Just because something is allowed within the game mechanics doesn't mean you have to do it. It's IC to attack someone seen as a threat. We are allowed to police ourselves IC. Didi is no threat to Spirit. She's not a threat to Shadow. She prefers to play a passive role and get along with everyone. I would think that ICly even Spirit would honour that role based on years of allowing her to do just that. She's not changed.
Rurthina
3
Re: Mildly Irritating: Aetolia's Pet Peeves
I'm with Mjoll, ya'll need to back the fuck up. Didi is an absolute gem that does absolutely nothing but try to bring positivity to the game, to both sides.
If she hits you, fucking take it. If she wants an eld, fucking let her have it. Ylem isn't such a big deal that you can't let the immortal vermin killer get a few elds. If she shows up to orrery and wants to hold onto the globe for a minute, let her. It's not like the orrery is such a big deal that you can't take a few minutes to allow Didi to have some fun and entertainment.
Yeah, there's a mix of OOC with IC, but Didi legitimately just wants everyone to have fun in the game (including her). There's multiple avenues to have fun. ALL OF YOU can take a minute and let her do some fancy stuff she's never been involved in before or maybe wants to enjoy. Even if she -does- roll with Shadow to a lesser/major, leave her alone because she's just there for moral support and fun.
While there are open pk zones, which I would otherwise be all for supporting slaughtering every single person in the game. All ya'll need to leave Didi alone. It doesn't make you look good at all to target a player who generally is the Aetolia Bastion of Goodness and Positivity.
If she hits you, fucking take it. If she wants an eld, fucking let her have it. Ylem isn't such a big deal that you can't let the immortal vermin killer get a few elds. If she shows up to orrery and wants to hold onto the globe for a minute, let her. It's not like the orrery is such a big deal that you can't take a few minutes to allow Didi to have some fun and entertainment.
Yeah, there's a mix of OOC with IC, but Didi legitimately just wants everyone to have fun in the game (including her). There's multiple avenues to have fun. ALL OF YOU can take a minute and let her do some fancy stuff she's never been involved in before or maybe wants to enjoy. Even if she -does- roll with Shadow to a lesser/major, leave her alone because she's just there for moral support and fun.
While there are open pk zones, which I would otherwise be all for supporting slaughtering every single person in the game. All ya'll need to leave Didi alone. It doesn't make you look good at all to target a player who generally is the Aetolia Bastion of Goodness and Positivity.
Rhyot
3
Re: Mildly Irritating: Aetolia's Pet Peeves
Spirit tethered by the loosest definition. Didi is a cityless, guildless character that by all accounts seems to spend more time around Shadow characters than anything.Imagine wanting to spend time with people that don't typically include you in anything and go out of their way to hunt you down.
Haven
4