Goblin Squad Member
|
Settlement Leaders and Membership,
I would like to have a meeting with all of the Settlement Leaders to talk about Crowdforging and the direction of the game. After talking to several Settlement Leaders over the last 48 hours it is apparent, to me, that we really need a server wide meeting to potentially hammer out a list of suggestions to submit to Goblinworks.
I would like for each Settlement Leader who attends to talk with their membership and come up with a list of their top 5 suggestions for intimidate implementation. These lists will be discussed at the meeting and hopefully we all can come to a solidified list of our own to submit to Goblinworks.
If you would like to attend this meeting please post your intent here, as well as days/times you would be available for a meeting. If you want you can just send me a private message. If you can't make the meeting, please come up with your list anyways and private message it to me.
Thank you all for your time,
Cheatle
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OH HELL NO!!!!!
Crowdforging is for ALL PLAYERS.
ALL PLAYERS!
ALL PLAYERS!
I like my settlement leader, but I will urge GW to freaking ignore ANY attempt to create self selected SPOKESMEN for crowdforging.
You get to crowdforge the Settlement Window... THAT'S ALL.
The rest of the game belongs to ALL OF US, and ALL OF US are going to crowdforge it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
OH HELL NO!!!!!
Crowdforging is for ALL PLAYERS.
ALL PLAYERS!
ALL PLAYERS!
I like my settlement leader, but I will urge GW to freaking ignore ANY attempt to create self selected SPOKESMEN for crowdforging.
You get to crowdforge the Settlement Window... THAT'S ALL.
The rest of the game belongs to ALL OF US, and ALL OF US are going to crowdforge it.
While I agree with most of what you say, I don't mind if the settlement leaders have a little tête à tête and bring forward suggestions - the more channels to provide good feedback the better.
In my view, it's just a bunch of players discussing the game - they just happen to be settlement leaders.
Let all the tanners or monster hunters or PvP enthusiasts get together and discuss the game too if they want to, why not? As long as one group of players gets no special treatment or labelled line of communication with the devs (which I think is what you were opposing - and I agree)
Settlement Leaders and Membership,
I would like for each Settlement Leader who attends to talk with their membership and come up with a list of their top 5 suggestions for intimidate implementation.
I *highly* approve of the bolded part though. Let those devs know who's boss. LOL :-)
While I agree with most of what you say, I don't mind if the settlement leaders have a little tête à tête and bring forward suggestions - the more channels to provide good feedback the better.
There are PUBLIC forums for crowdforging here and in the GW forums.
Private backroom crowdforging will be the death of crowdforging, especially as a font of revenue to our favorite industry.
If every time someone tries to crowdforge a game, 16 players try to dominate the process, the other thousands of players are going to walk away from crowdforging.
If 16 people are allowed to usurp our voices, they will also have succeeded at usurping our wallets. THAT is an unsustainable business model for attracting and retaining customers.
I don't want token inclusion into a comm system controlled by another player.
I want OPEN PUBLIC crowdforging hosted by the devs where every player has an equal say. You know, like what already exists.
The opinions of settlement leaders are no more valid than any other players' opinion. I'd also argue that except for the settlement window, that they are too busy managing people (and each other) to actually play the game as much as most serious players.
Hell, Slammy can tell the devs more about their game than any settlement leader.
Frankly, I'm going to predict that when GW finally weighs in, they will actually speak out against backroom crowdforging and might even threaten to ban anyone that is caught trying it, in the future.
GW has to make it clear to the O.P. (and any other would-be cabals) that they can't hijack the crowdforging process from the thousands of people who poured their wallets and time into this game.
We don't need settlement leaders to represent our interests in crowdforging. This thread is just an ambitious power grab by the O.P. and he should be ashamed for suggesting it and apologize to all of us for having allowed himself to become that smug.
And please don't for a second think I'm saying that because we exchange towers once in a while. I'd say the same thing if my own settlement leader had tried this.
I am not a leader, but could you put "Energetic Field and it's impact on PvP/lowbie gankers" on the agenda?
lol, you do know. that it only costs 180exp to use this skill right?
that's an hour and 40 mins of exp.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not a leader, but could you put "Energetic Field and it's impact on PvP/lowbie gankers" on the agenda?
lol, you do know. that it only costs 180exp to use this skill right?
that's an hour and 40 mins of exp.
I know. Because it is so powerful and low cost, everybody can and will need to have it to at least be on the same fast footing as the rest, with this insta-speed, spammable get-out-jail card. Since it does not scale in speed but only in duration (maybe, not even sure) there is no need to invest.
When everybody feels they are required to take it (for harvesters, travelers, 1000xp-gankers and people that want to catch gankers) then you are destroying any meaningful choice and may as well scrap it. I am all for such a spell, I just think it should cost Power or more investment. This is why I think Speed, the Power-version of EF is not overpowered. Using this is a trade-off (power consumption), using EF is a no-brainer.
But hey, all my toons have it, it'll be nice to see everyone zipping across the countryside. :)
Maybe GW meant for everyone to have an easy Speed boost available early on, or maybe you get much better speed boosts later on after investing that will easily trump level 1 EF. Not really counting on it but it could be. So I am just asking that GW should look at this spell if it is working as intended.
There are a lot of options that would make it viable again, and a choice: have it scale in speed, make it more expensive, gate it at a certain level. I guess after 10 years everyeone still could have it(not bound to a class), but that is not the same as everyone having it 1 minute after you roll your character.
Anyway, this thread is not the right place for it, I just had it on my mind.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree with Midnight on this one- I don't see any reason why this community can't assemble a list of priorities inclusively and publicly. It's not like there's any great mystery or controversy what the flaws in the game are- I suspect that anyone of reasonable intelligence and good will could make a list that would 80% match with anyone else's.
Cheatle, can you explain why you think the player/dev conversation needs to be de-democratized? Maybe you could just post your own top 5 here and we could all talk about that.
I agree with Midnight on this one- I don't see any reason why this community can't assemble a list of priorities inclusively and publicly. It's not like there's any great mystery or controversy what the flaws in the game are- I suspect that anyone of reasonable intelligence and good will could make a list that would 80% match with anyone else's.
Cheatle, can you explain why you think the player/dev conversation needs to be de-democratized? Maybe you could just post your own top 5 here and we could all talk about that.
+1
The problem is that crowdforging benefits from being highly focused and clear, something based to achieve in a public forum. Settlement leaders, generally speaking, should represent the interests of their settlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I find myself agreeing with Midnight.
While I understand the impulse to turn to a representative form of discussion for brevity's sake, such an approach inevitably leads to a distinction between those who speak for the population, and the population itself.
And such a forum leaves out entirely those who have not yet chosen a settlement; those who are not active on their chosen settlement's voice/forum chat (but may be very active in game); those who haven't yet started playing but who have backed the game and are following it intently; and those whose views may be a minority in individual settlements (and, thus, not a Top Five) but, when taken as a percentage of the full population, rise to that level.
I'm all for interest groups' discussions - I want a bard group, myself - but crowdforging ought to be done by the crowd, not filtered through layers of leaders, however messy it is.
Settlement leaders, generally speaking, should represent the interests of their settlement.
Settlements are a fictional game mechanic.
Crowdforging is a real life experimental business process to make a game that pleases customers.
Joining a settlement has as much to do with my crowdforging dollars as attacking an ogre.
I'm sure Cheatle does a fine job representing people's interest in game. As I develop good alignment characters I may even try out Brighthaven. After all 90+ characters can't be wrong.
But neither he nor my current settlement leader gets to crowdforge for me.
The only way a settlement leader is going to crowdforge in my name is if they pay my subscriptions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
First off, immediate*, lol
Second, if I open this meeting to everyone were going to have quite a few people show up and there is a potential for this meeting to get very out of hand. The intention here was for the leadership to discuss their suggestions with their membership and then bring those to the meeting. I specifically say that these are suggestions made by the leader's membership.
@Guurzak,
I think it should totally be democratized, and as I just said, this isn't a meeting for leaders to decide what they want, but what THEIR SETTLEMENT WANTS. Pretty sure I have posted my top 5 in multiple places, its not like I am attempting some kind of back room deal here, I was attempting to get leadership together and stream line the wants of the population that are actually active (which is really like 11 settlements).
Furthermore, every time someone posts something about crowdforging said thread usually devolves due to several key people. Having a smaller meeting, with everyone prepared and already having their lists, makes things easier to discuss.
If you want to do this more democratically, each settlement leader could get their membership's top 5, and we could turn that into one single post that is open for debate, but all the priorities are posted in one place.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather see GW implement the survey feature to the launcher app like they mentioned in a previous blog post. Provide a list of 10 known issues, and have people check boxes for 5 before they log in.
I've seen it used in other crowd-forgey style games and it is an effective way, IMHO, to get a good snapshot of the population's opinion, rather than the opinion of the vocal or influential minority.
I'm of the same sentiment as Midnight (btw I'm starting to become a big fan, lol).
Basically, I'm in favor of anything that doesn't further increase the influence of the entrenched Alpha Aristrocracy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps it's time for Goblinworks to form that Player Council...
We will likely have some form of player council like the EVE Online Council of Stellar Management that will be a representative body for the players to channel their suggestions and feedback through that will meet with the developers regularly and be a conduit for those ideas.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd rather see GW implement the survey feature to the launcher app like they mentioned in a previous blog post. Provide a list of 10 known issues, and have people check boxes for 5 before they log in.
I've seen it used in other crowd-forgey style games and it is an effective way, IMHO, to get a good snapshot of the population's opinion, rather than the opinion of the vocal or influential minority.
I'm of the same sentiment as Midnight (btw I'm starting to become a big fan, lol).
Basically, I'm in favor of anything that doesn't further increase the influence of the entrenched Alpha Aristrocracy.
IMHO they should list the top 30 known issues (10 each from programming, art and gameplay/balancing), and have players pick the top 3 to be focused on.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
LOL Nihimon.
Generally, the intent here was not a power grab, I would like to think that a lot of people here know me by now.
@Doc,
The issue that I see is that currently those that are the loudest are currently being heard the most. Then we have a situation where ideascale is purely being tapped for ideas, which we might end up seeing on said surveys (when ever they might be out). I can back off, but I don't see anyone else trying to make a concentrated effort to hear the most pressing issues.
I specifically said "I would like for each Settlement Leader who attends to talk with their membership and come up with a list of their top 5 suggestions," but it seems like that was ignored entirely.
The entire intent here was to list some suggestion for Goblinworks to use in their surveys that are currently the most pressing matters, represented by lists complied by settlement leadership asking their members.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are not exclusive, I'm just very opposed to the further bolstering of a small group that has preferential notice from the developers.
The player-base isn't so large that it needs a representative form of governance to filter player concerns. A survey on the launcher before log in should suffice, and probably provide less skewed or politicized feedback.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I specifically said "I would like for each Settlement Leader who attends to talk with their membership and come up with a list of their top 5 suggestions," but it seems like that was ignored entirely.
I read that, I don't ignore anything you say.
The thing is, I live in the US, and I send emails to my congressmen, and they do whatever they want. The same can happen here.
I don't need somebody to be my representative to Goblin Works, after-all the player population isn't really that big. They have a community support person, I think they should leverage her abilities and use surveys and such, heck even something like Survey Monkey until the feature is in place.
To be honest, I'm a bit surprised there aren't surveys being conducted on a weekly basis, considering this is supposed to be crowdforged.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Doc,
That is exactly what I was thinking, there is pretty much nothing being done to ascertain the most pressing matters. Yes, GW is listening, the next patch shows they are listening, but there is no prioritization. If we had weekly surveys, or whatever X amount of time, that would really start to hone in on what we want as a collective.
This is what I was attempting to do, just trying to find that list.
How would you feel if each settlement ran its own survey/debate, then someone collectively posted those results here on the forums to give the devs a list for their polls?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think pushing crowdforging to the level of demands risks GW having to shut down the crowdforging concept. If it's bad with a few hundred players active in the forums, it will likely be unusable with a few thousand. GW cannot develop fast enough to meet players' insistent expectations (which can change every week) and may have to just say "this is not working" and pull the plug on our crowdforging.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The general problem is they have to crib ideas that are buried in random posts, that happen to get enough votes on Ideascale, or that they think of.
If we provide a basic list of things that a large portion of the vocal and active people find annoying and they throw that into their survey system with anything else, I can't see the harm.
I also believe they have said several times just because an idea is popular does not mean they are going to do it.
If there's a meeting of some sort we will send someone or a few reps from the League.
Aside, on the note of not trusting your leadership...then why are they your leadership?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
GW can stick a survey on the loading screen and get loads of input from all of the players. Stick a comments box on it so players can bring up issues not covered on the survey.
Such a survey could even be discussed further on the forums to get more in depth analysis and feedback.
This is what I was attempting to do, just trying to find that list.
I'd say just make it an open list that people can add to, anything that bugs them about the game. Easy to make in Google Spreadsheets or something.
Then take that list, and throw them all in one big matrix survey and ask people to rate the amount of pain each item gives them when playing, 1 to 5, kind of thing.
If each item is labeled in a concise way so they're easy to skim, people can get through the survey a couple minutes even if it has 30 line items.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alright, fair enough.
Here you go List of Concerns for Survey/Poll Material
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't see why this can't go to ideascale and then settlement leaders can keep pointing devs to whats important to them with the polling power of ideascale being used to show popular community support.
I think the primary suggestion is going to be a little too much like herding cats. And also is rather elitist and exclusive. I understand the logic for the purposes of holding a meeting, but I don't think this needs a meeting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From what I can see hardly anyone uses/checks Ideascale anymore.
The fact that they don't want us to discuss the ideas here once we post them there has reduced the draw for new people. There are a couple of hundred, some of whom check regularly, most of whom don't think about it.
If it's going to function, new people need to be encouraged to participate regularly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alright, fair enough, but here is what I mean:
Ideascale has 510 users
Since EE started there have been 29 ideas posted by 14 people (some posting multiple ideas), with the same 25 people voting, on all of them. Close to 3% of the crowdforgers are posting ideas and only 5% or so are voting using Ideascale.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will not speak for every Golgothan on how they want to see this game evolve and expand.
I am not nearly arrogant enough to say that I, nor any of my officers, can speak for every individual with absolute certainty on what they envision.
This isn't a settlement leader issue, this is a playerbase issue.
(Obviously this is an OOC comment. Because my character is more than arrogant enough)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Maybe it could be open to everyone, but ask anyone not identifying as a settlement of company rep to mute themselves and communicate via chat.
ROFL..... "Hey, you, you're not a leader, then shut the f$ck up and sit in the corner".
I know Cal, you didn't mean it to sound that way, but on my first read that is how it read,
@ Nihimon
A player's council was disasterous for Star Trek Online, and it has little use in EvE Online. It would never have critical representation and woukd likely be stocked with sycophants, Fanbois and elitest a-holes. Even if I were on it, I would be a critical, elitiest a-hole.
I would also venture a guess that 90% of our top five will be declared, "Not MVP", "We are working on it" or "Not even close to our Priority".
If the Devs don't know the top five by now, they are not reading. Since I do believe they do read, the top five are already on their minds.
Here are the five from UNC:
1. Company / Settlement Leadership functions, most importantly being able to accept applications by multiple people (officers).
2. Shared Banking (account, company, settlement).
3. Stream line chat and group invites. Use drop down menus instead of typing. Some players have interesting names or are we to only want to associate with characters with 3-letter names?
4. Clean Up bugs, other fixes and several animations.
5. Tab targeting of resource nodes while in grouped combat.
From what I can see hardly anyone uses/checks Ideascale anymore.
One of the failures of PFO's usage of IdeaScale is that a lot of people just downvote stuff without commenting on why. It's basically just Reddit.
I've also noticed a lot of people on IdeaScale downvoting some pretty basic and reasonable things for seemingly irrational or fundamentalist reasons.
It seems like another case of a minority of people having inordinate influence over the shaping of the issues.
Even the idea of doing the little survey above we proposed will be skewed because it will mainly contain the input from forum lurkers (people like me), rather than the bulk of the player base (which I don't think spends much time here).
Another reason to just get a snapshot of all players input via survey and review the data independently. If only that were already in place. :p
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Deacon Wulf,
If you have kept up with what I have stated, I don't think this is a settlement leader issue either. Nor do I feel like I can accurately represent every opinion with absolute certainty, I wasn't even asking that.
I believe the issue is that there are no solidified methods in which to crowdforge, other than screaming the loudest.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Reading through this thread - as well as through another hotly contested thread I wonder if all of this is just a (missing) trust issue.
I did read Cheatles post before Midnight responded and I actually liked it and the concerns Midnight voiced didn't even occur to me. Midnights post did convince me of some flaws and I back her. But that shouldn't just make everything Cheatle tried suddenly bad.
There is information that might better reach GW if it is bundled and organized. There is information that otherwise never reaches them. I will speak offline with a few gamers at a convention - some might not even have created a character yet in EE.
I guess the issue is that we are a very competitive crowd and any sign that someone might gain an advantage - either for himself or his settlement is seen with distrust.
This might not be wrong every time. Often there might be some advantage for someone / some group but the main advantage is for the overall game. I urge people to occasionally take a step back before replying in a heated manner to someone.
I know myself that there are certain posters where I have problems to reply in an objective manner. Sometimes I find myself afterwards that I only read what I wanted to read.
In the end - this is a fantastic community so far and with the few exemptions which decided not to play we all try to make it a better game. So sometimes just give the other person a little bit of leeway - all he might want to do might just be to make the game better.
Don't blame him/her when he/she tries to make the game better using a personal view that differs from yours.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This comes from me as a player and is the same thing I have said in my stream over and over.
I just want something more to do than log in and either:
A) Kill NpCs for recipes and salvage
B) Kill other players for the lolz
C) Train skills
D) Gather from nodes
There is a whole lot of boring grinding (Korean MMOs are jealous) with little to no sustenance.
Just give the game features. Anything really, just more of them. As it stands right now, this "sandbox" is missing almost all the sand. And it isn't the players faults, we brought the tools and brains for the challenge.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My problem is I forgot my ideascale password and have been too lazy to reset it -.-' Which is entirely my fault.
Exactly the same issue, here.
I really hate having to make accounts all over the place in order to participate in this sort of thing. Can't we just have one place for everything?
Often there might be some advantage for someone / some group but the main advantage is for the overall game. I urge people to occasionally take a step back before replying in a heated manner to someone.
Don't blame him/her when he/she tries to make the game better using a personal view that differs from yours.
I just absolutely hated the idea because I'm here for the crowdforging and I won't allow anyone to take it out of my hands. Certainly not at this stage of the game.
Cheatle might as well have offered to have someone eat my pizza for me. :-)
I get that people raised in societies that work like our real world works are used to individuals ceding their power to representatives. And in game, many of us already cede some of our independence to group goals. Cheatle just might be getting a little too used to that and needed to consider that some of us make very very clear distinctions between the game and the real world, especially the crowdforging that we are paying a real world premium for... from our real world wallets.
I just needed to be real clear that no one else is crowdforging for me. If that means I vilify someone for thinking (even for a moment) that it is an option, then.. well... that happened.
If anyone else ever thinks that someone else can crowdforge for me, I will likely vilify them too.
That being said, I like the way the thread has progressed since then.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My problem is I forgot my ideascale password and have been too lazy to reset it -.-' Which is entirely my fault.Exactly the same issue, here.
I really hate having to make accounts all over the place in order to participate in this sort of thing. Can't we just have one place for everything?
Yes, please.
I'm aware I'm a technologically-challenged dinosaur <waves AARP card menacingly> but I've never used Ideascale. Or Google Docs. (And yes, I remember using punch cards to input programs, you young whippersnappers!). I'm perfectly happy to contribute - to babble on at length, in fact - but I really don't eant to have to go to multiple places to do so.