Rules change proposal: Negative WoL

[Neo Eternity]

Neo - I see nothing in your argument that suggests the comparisons to larger MMORPG's is invalid, and here's why. The Duels are *not* in and of themselves an MMORG, they are the PVP aspect to the MMO that is free-form Role-playing as a whole.

In fact, I can name you two big-name MMORPG's that do exactly what you say MMORPG's do *not*. Guild Wars and Warhammer online are both almost completely devoted to the notion of pure Player vs. Player.

But again, I point out that the Duels are not an MMORPG in and of themselves, they are just one facet of the overall FFRPG experience which *is* an MMORPG.

I had no ideas MMORPGs like that existed. It seems I am looking at things the wrong way yet again. I apologize for my repeated oversights.

I really, really think more obvious FAQ's/Newbie information is something that will help with this. For example, I've been a member of this forum and community for how many years now? Fourish? I had no idea Jas even had those FAQ's posted. I would really like to see the Houses make a return too, just to foster the group environment. Even if the design isn't to teach dueling skills, knowing that you're not trying to fight your way out of a negative WoL hole alone is enough to stick around and try.

This. Allllll of this. Especially the last sentence.

[Elijah]

I couldn't make it through all 8 pages of replies to Kalamere's players 's originial post on the subject and my initial thought was "hell no" to the blasphemous premise of not keeping track of negative WoL for the cycle. Mostly, because I am a traditionalist and had to earn my stripes the hard old fashioned way, by facing Warlords who's Fancies still got them a half point score even if their base move failed, I found a way to make Warlord within a cycle.

But these are different times as far as getting players in the dueling venues to duel unlike the early days of AOL where the Red Dragon Inn was one of about 20 chat rooms on a list that first popped up when you first signed on AOL. The numbers certainly aren't being thrown at the dueling community like they were 15 years ago, and the variety of gaming you can do online whether graphic or text based has exploded beyond belief in the time since then.

So I guess I can compromise a little in my preference. If a character is truly new and not a different variation of a known screenname/RoH profile, then they should get a "probationary period". Regardless of what point of the cycle the dueling sport is in the new character could get like 15 to 20 to 25 or to 30 "non-official duels" as a sort of grace period.

After "x" number of duels then all duels count win or lose after that, and during the "x" number of duels probationary period no duels win or lose count. I think something like 12 to 20 duels in the probabtionary period would be enough, and then after that they get treated like everyone else, and if they have a negative WoL record at the end of cycles, atleast they gety zeroed out then.

Gnort went a bunch of cycles of dueling with having his record zeroed out each time, Tass was the eternal commoner too. These examples made for good role-playing.

I agree we need to make the dueling more attractive to bring players and retain them easier then we have in the past but at the same time we have to protect the integrity and the history of the games. I think a probationary "x" number of duels to get your feet wet as it were before things count for real might be a decent compromise.

If for some reason negative WoL were zeroed out every week for everyone then the number of WoL needed for each rank should increase dramatically higher.

[Leuni]

Well, I'm not going to admit how many hours it just took me to read all these pages (and then write up a respons).... except to say that I did have plans to duel tonight but my eyes are burning too much now .... ahem. I think I'm just gonna key in on a few things from the newbie viewpoint. I've bolded and colored some of those from others.

Even someone like me who has been around a long time, I'm extremely disheartened on how hard it is to gain rank and I think I'm suffering some burnout, feeling like it's just not worth it to keep trying.

And if I'm going to speak honestly, if it's taking people years and years and years to achieve a rank in sport, I have to wonder if it's because of a broken system or if the player in question is just bad at that sport....

Okay, I have to break in here ....

I don't know about others, but duelling isn't the top priority of me being here. Roleplaying is. Dueling is just a tool to use in the story of my characters, one that adds an OOC element of chance, sorta like dice used to.

I think sometimes priorities can get lost and mixed with OOC feelings and perspectives along the way for some people, thus contributing to the burnt out stages and skewed objectives. Sometimes, I've been like that myself and have had to kick myself back in shape, straighten my priority and perspective even if it meant just taking some time away. I think it happens to everyone at some point, but I don't think it's something one should just let be....

However.... Do I think, If my character isn't making the so called grade that it's because I, and not my character, is bad at the sport? Do I think, if I'm so bad at dueling - or more to the point, guessing the counter move to someone else's move - that I should just throw in the towel no matter what character I'm playing here, and quit?! Maybe I should be elsewhere. Okay, nOt!

If I leave this area it'll only be because I'm far too disappointed in the roleplay on a large scale, or else something more important like real life isn't allowing me the time to bE here.

My priority isn't getting the rank, it's the roleplay around the attempt. In a FFRP area, which I thought this place was, that would be the top proirity to sell and I think there are some players who have lost that edge.

I know there are some players who won't come to this area because of this type of priority - gaining score/rank is above roleplay. Perhaps that's a reason to add to the possibilities of why so many characters aren't staying around after the first few months.

In other words, I don't think it's so much the rules (zeroing out of scores) that need so much fixing as it is the perspective of individual players.

Priority of Roleplaying should be above the scoring/ranks. It's a point that I think should belong in at least the tips and advise for new players, if it's not somewhere around already. Honestly, I don't remember off hand.

However, my point? Yes, I've thought that it would be nice to have a zeroing of the records more frequently would help. But *I* also found it more enjoyable to just play and duel and have fun and enjoy those I was dueling with. I'm sure there were many times in my career as the Emperor of Commoners where I could have advanced, had I so chosen too. However, I had different goals back then.. like being the first commoner baron.. (damn you Deathlord!).

Yes, today's dueling is different than back then. Hell, it's different from 5 years ago. But to me, even if they did zero things out on a monthly basis back then, I doubt it would have changed anything for me.

I agree, it is more fun just to play and enjoy the play with others.... and I don't think zeroing things out would change things much for anyone. Perhaps it might even discourage the not so active - who might be so because of an active RL. I think the three month span gives a player a longer chance to duel for a new rank, which is more a courtesy to the Player. Maybe I'm misunderstanding that one? I dunno, I'm still confused about some things. Par for the course of not being able to bE here as often.

If I 'm thinking of it right, I think it might make things worse on other levels simply because some of the flavor of play by some people (Not All) that I've witness over the past several months is on the dueling alone and getting rank rather then the journey of the individual character's story. It's become not a character thing but a Player thing instead.

I'm sorry if this offends, but I think that's a sad way to play. It's like using dice so that the dice become more important then the actual move that was made with them. I remember that from my aol days and that priority was also disappointing then as well. It got so it didn't matter what the move was, it was just the luck of the dice. It took away from the roleplay. and I had to ask myself, what's the point? Sometimes I go into the dueling rings and I find myself asking the same thing.

Are ya trackin with me? Does anyone get what I'm saying?

Don't get me wrong, it's not like that for me all the time. There are some who do know the balance between the play and the tools and prioritize the roleplay.

There really does need to be a "New Duelists' FAQ", or possibly a reworking of the already existing Game Guides over on the sidebar.

A lot has changed that just isn't covered anymore, and giving New Duelists some idea of what can be expected during each quarter can do a lot to keep spirits up in the face of negative WoL.

Well, the FAQs in there appear to be 3+ years old. At the very least an update is in order. Possibly consolidate aspects of the FAQs under one general "New Duelist FAQ" and place the link in a more prominent area, possibly beneath the "Getting Started" tab on the menu. There should be a "Tips" section as well, not just for gaming but for the roleplaying aspect too.

Throw too many bones to low ranks, and people will start asking themselves what's the point of gaining rank? Make it too tough to gain rank, and people will wonder if it is worth the effort.

I agree.

I would really like to see the Houses make a return too, just to foster the group environment. Even if the design isn't to teach dueling skills, knowing that you're not trying to fight your way out of a negative WoL hole alone is enough to stick around and try.

Four'ish years??? I don't feel so bad...

Even I like the idea of Houses/groups like this. It fosters commaradere for both IC and OOC reasons. It's also another RP element even better then just duel's themselves. And I think they can be used to help with mentoring and teaching how to duel to new players.

And, Yep.... a more Newbie friendly gathering of information would indeed help. Although I'm slowly getting better, I'm still confused about all the ranks, the different duels, the different zones, what's official and not official as far as tournaments go... the zeroing out of my what points? I have points? Have I EVER had points?

Speaking of points... I agree someone who's been at this awhile should rewrite information like it was suggested, though it might not hurt to include a newbie or two to help proof them just to see if they are really helpful to the newbies. Sometimes, when one is used to things so much, they tend to forget what they consider obvious, and the points are lost to the newbie.

Anyway, hope that helps in some way.

[Angelica Rose]

I believe the system is fine where it stands.

The Houses and mentoring need to be revived. You are seeing more and more interaction from the RDI side as people discover the sports and try to incorporate it into their RP.

I think one of the biggest turn offs has been the limited cooperative RP that is currently in place.

Misty has been know to grab me for OOC duel training, so I don't mind coming in to help out houses or even training.

Hells, The Institute of Arcane Principle has RP setup for training in the DoM and made the DoM part of the curriculum (And Angel is Negative WoL so she will always fall off the standings...). Add that into the House Roster and I'll make sure to get that running fully again.

[Jake]

Okay, I have to break in here ....

I don't know about others, but duelling isn't the top priority of me being here. Roleplaying is. Dueling is just a tool to use in the story of my characters, one that adds an OOC element of chance, sorta like dice used to.

I think sometimes priorities can get lost and mixed with OOC feelings and perspectives along the way for some people, thus contributing to the burnt out stages and skewed objectives. Sometimes, I've been like that myself and have had to kick myself back in shape, straighten my priority and perspective even if it meant just taking some time away. I think it happens to everyone at some point, but I don't think it's something one should just let be....

However.... Do I think, If my character isn't making the so called grade that it's because I, and not my character, is bad at the sport? Do I think, if I'm so bad at dueling - or more to the point, guessing the counter move to someone else's move - that I should just throw in the towel no matter what character I'm playing here, and quit?! Maybe I should be elsewhere. Okay, nOt!

If I leave this area it'll only be because I'm far too disappointed in the roleplay on a large scale, or else something more important like real life isn't allowing me the time to bE here.

My priority isn't getting the rank, it's the roleplay around the attempt. In a FFRP area, which I thought this place was, that would be the top proirity to sell and I think there are some players who have lost that edge.

I know there are some players who won't come to this area because of this type of priority - gaining score/rank is above roleplay. Perhaps that's a reason to add to the possibilities of why so many characters aren't staying around after the first few months.

In other words, I don't think it's so much the rules (zeroing out of scores) that need so much fixing as it is the perspective of individual players.

Priority of Roleplaying should be above the scoring/ranks. It's a point that I think should belong in at least the tips and advise for new players, if it's not somewhere around already. Honestly, I don't remember off hand.

Yes, and no.

RP is not the priority. Nor should it be. If it were, we'd just be another RDI, SEB, etc. The dueling is what gives RoH its unique character. Without it, we're just another roleplay site.

On the other side of that equation, we're more than a game. If we were just a game, we could print out a set of cards and play "DoS" at a card table (which as a matter of fact, I've done with Siera Red's player).

It's the synergy of RP and dueling (aka the game) that makes RoH what it is. So, the trick is to make sure that we're providing something for both crowds, and that there's balance.

We want the roleplayers. But we're also about the game and the structure (which is the matrix, the challenges, all of it). The roleplay is what provides the color. It's what makes any given duel/challenge/tourney memorable. Or at least MORE memorable.

The duels that really stick out in my mind over the years are those that had RP attached to them. Like Valmion's challenge to Overlord MadMadMax, or the death of Dalamar, or Shakira. Or when BRK insisted on being the tester for all challengers to Overlord Gnimish, and when Gnim refused to apply the test against a particular challenger, BRK turned around and challenged Gnim.

It's a complementary relationship. We want to foster both, without ever judging that Player A enjoys the gaming part of it, and Player B enjoys the RP more.

[Jake]

I think one of the biggest turn offs has been the limited cooperative RP that is currently in place.

I'm not attacking your perception, but I'd ask you to back up that statement. How/why do you feel the cooperative RP has been limited?

[Kalamere]

I agree, it is more fun just to play and enjoy the play with others.... and I don't think zeroing things out would change things much for anyone. Perhaps it might even discourage the not so active - who might be so because of an active RL. I think the three month span gives a player a longer chance to duel for a new rank, which is more a courtesy to the Player. Maybe I'm misunderstanding that one? I dunno, I'm still confused about some things. Par for the course of not being able to bE here as often.

I believe you misunderstand the way this works.

As things stand currently, ranks are gained on a weekly basis based on your Wins over Losses record. The proposal here wouldn't change that time frame at all. So, whether it takes you a week, 3 weeks or 6 months to achieve 2 wins more than you have losses, once you do it you will be marked as a Swordsman (or 1st rank in whichever sport) on the next posted standings.

The proposal is talking about what happens to those people who lose more than they win, thereby having a negative Wins to Losses ratio.

As things stand currently, the folks with negative win to loss ratio have their records zeroed out at the end of the cycle. So, every 3 months in DoS and DoF, every 2 in DoM. When the end of the cycle rolls around, if your record is something like 1 win, 4 losses, you are returned to 0 wins 0 losses and now instead of having to win 5 (3 to get out of the hole and then 2 to achieve rank) duels to get to the first rank (Swordsman in DoS), you instead are put back to a new duelist's state of only needing the 2.

This thread began by proposing that instead of waiting to do this every 2 or 3 months, that we do it more frequently in hopes of pulling people out of those holes.

Make more sense?

[Angelica Rose]

Given the call to restart the houses? I'll qualify that further... For a new player. Jumping into existing stories is daunting and not to mention rude to the players already in.

I think one of the biggest turn offs has been the limited cooperative RP that is currently in place.

I'm not attacking your perception, but I'd ask you to back up that statement. How/why do you feel the cooperative RP has been limited?

[Leuni]

Make more sense?

Most definitely!
Thank you so much!

Okay, so why don't all three - DoM, DoF, DoS - zero out at the same cycle times? I think thAt would help cut down some confusion for newbies and maybe make things more uniform and might actually help participation for those wanting to do more then one of the three types. Kinda help them split up their time more uniformly or juggle it by cycles would make it a bit easier because all the cycles would zero out on the same day.

I don't know how much work goes into this zeroing out. Maybe once a month is a good time frame. Maybe two is better. But Three does seem kinda long. I dunno. I just think maybe having the same cycle times and zero out days would help me... cause I'm forgetful and get confused easily. ::nod::

It's a complementary relationship. We want to foster both, without ever judging that Player A enjoys the gaming part of it, and Player B enjoys the RP more.

And I can agree with that. You're right, it is both. And I can even see it being equally so.

[Kalamere]

Okay, so why don't all three - DoM, DoF, DoS - zero out at the same cycle times?

The issue of cycle length is an entirely different can of worms best left undisturbed at this time! Keeping in mind that the zero'ing of negative WoL records is only one of the things that happens at cycle end.

But, yes, I'd love to see all 3 do it (the zero'ing out of negative WoL) both more regularly and on the same time frame. As you can probably see by the preceding 8 pages though, the idea is not well supported by player opinion.

edit to clarify last paragraph

[Leuni]

The issue of cycle length is an entirely different can or worms best left undisturbed at this time! Keeping in mind that the zero'ing of negative WoL records is only one of the things that happens at cycle end.

But, yes, I'd love to see all 3 do it both more regularly and on the same time frame. As you can probably see by the preceding 8 pages though, the idea is not well supported by player opinion.

I say shake up the can! Make them all the same cycle window, same zero out date.

Make it easier for newbies to understand this whole place and they might be more likely to stay a bit longer. Maybe. Well, Ideally it would be a step in the right direction. I think.

Course, what do I know?

[Jake]

The issue of cycle length is an entirely different can or worms best left undisturbed at this time! Keeping in mind that the zero'ing of negative WoL records is only one of the things that happens at cycle end.

But, yes, I'd love to see all 3 do it both more regularly and on the same time frame. As you can probably see by the preceding 8 pages though, the idea is not well supported by player opinion.

I say shake up the can! Make them all the same cycle window, same zero out date.

Make it easier for newbies to understand this whole place and they might be more likely to stay a bit longer. Maybe. Well, Ideally it would be a step in the right direction. I think.

Course, what do I know?

I've never really understood why they aren't on the same cycle. Or why DoM felt a need to have an extra rank at 20 WoL.

My recollection is that one of the arguments for the shorter DoM cycle was to allow for more frequent Archmage Tournies, since the path to Archmage (the top title) is more difficult than for either the Diamond or Overlord. (In DoF, it's win a tourney. In DoS, it's challenge for the title. In DoM, it's win a tourney in order to earn the right to challenge.)

From an RoH-wide perspective, I do feel it would benefit the newcomer to have consistency in all three (and any future) sports. Same 3 month cycle. Same 2,5,10,15 + titles structure.

The matrices are different (and should remain so), but some of the other elements create commonality and reduce the learning curve of newcomers.

[Kheldar]

The issue of cycle length is an entirely different can or worms best left undisturbed at this time! Keeping in mind that the zero'ing of negative WoL records is only one of the things that happens at cycle end.

But, yes, I'd love to see all 3 do it both more regularly and on the same time frame. As you can probably see by the preceding 8 pages though, the idea is not well supported by player opinion.

I say shake up the can! Make them all the same cycle window, same zero out date.

It is pretty much optimal for the cycles to not be synced up. All of the sports have tournaments that need to be scheduled after each cycle (WLT, Talon, DQ, PC, AMT, ART). Having the DoS and DoF cycles off set by a month makes it much easier to get all of them in without tripping over each other or over-scheduling them. DoM holds its tournaments earlier in the week, and announces their tournament lineup at the beginning of the year making it easy enough to avoid conflicting times with them as well. I didn't think that it was that hard of a thing to figure out, but if it is the standings are labeled by week of the cycle as well as date, it should make things fairly simple to keep track of.

[Neo Eternity]

but if it is the standings are labeled by week of the cycle as well as date, it should make things fairly simple to keep track of.

I'll add this to the DoM Standings once the next cycle starts, which is soon.

[Jake]

It is pretty much optimal for the cycles to not be synced up. All of the sports have tournaments that need to be scheduled after each cycle (WLT, Talon, DQ, PC, AMT, ART). Having the DoS and DoF cycles off set by a month makes it much easier to get all of them in without tripping over each other or over-scheduling them. DoM holds its tournaments earlier in the week, and announces their tournament lineup at the beginning of the year making it easy enough to avoid conflicting times with them as well. I didn't think that it was that hard of a thing to figure out, but if it is the standings are labeled by week of the cycle as well as date, it should make things fairly simple to keep track of.

I'd have an easier time accepting that argument if all three sports were in synch.

AMT is every other month. ART is every other month. Which means there's a DoM event every month.

DoF and DoS may be accommodating each other by being staggered, but DoM is essentially doing its own thing.

Running with the proposition that it's a good idea for the sports to be staggered (and that we'll never have more than the 3 sports), it would seem "optimal" for all of them to run 3 month cycles, and then stagger Dec/Jan/Feb, Mar/Apr/May, etc.