Jump to content
No one

Viscosity - the magic of lands

Recommended Posts

Maybe MD should change its mind regarding the viscosity.

I don't know yet what would solve this ... inactivity but I am working (thinking) on it.

I don't know if lowering the viscosity is the solution nor that it is the problem. My mind keeps going to the idea that MD is too large for such a small amount of ppl and being too large , the viscosity climbs, the paths are "longer" and thus the "distance" between players is greater.

For a while I fiddled with the idea of closing some areas or some lands but as agreed with dst I threw it as undesirable due to the history of each land and of the ppl of that land.


So, my next idea is to add a little "magic" to the only thing left without magic in MagicDuel: to the land itself.
The idea is not perfect, I know, but it is something that will hinder our MDL (MD lives) and will bring ppl closer thoghether.
So, the idea is to shrink the land in its unused zones.
Considering the land path like A-B-C-D-E and a side road B-F

1. land marks will be omitted (lets say A as land entrance and E as land capital)

2. if in a land we have adiacent zones with max viscosity (like B & C or C & D and so on) these pairs will become candidtates to shrinking.

3. taking each candidate pair, in random order, it will check each member (again in random order) to see if it can be "hidden" and still keep the rule 2 like:
 - taking B&C, if A's viscosity is at max, B is a "valid candidate" to be hidden, if D's viscosity is at max, then C is also a "valid candidate" to be hidden
 - then a (one) random candidate between B & C (or from the entire list of "valid candidates" in the land) from each land will be hidden.

4. by hiding, I mean that
 - instead of normal travel through these "hidden" locations, you will just jump over it (considering B and D are hidden, the land path will be A-C-E)
 - indeed, if not marked as land mark, by hiding crossroad, you will restrict the access to that path (see the B-F path) as the "next" location is to be chosen at random from the available travel choices.
 - indeed again, even land marks (as capitals & secondary exit locations) can be hidden.
 - each choice should be remembered until unhidden


5. of course, un-hiding locations can / should also occur.
 - these un-hiding conditions should also take into consideration pairs as in "the new pairs" like A-C & C-E
 - for each candidate pair, if the viscosity falls below 40 (as in 39 or less), then one random hidden location between them should unhide (like in a pair A-E, any of the B,C or D could un-hide).
 - also, if one edge of the pair gets to 0 (zero) then the hidden location NEXT to it should get unhidden

6. Other necessary rules
 - any one person with enough (to be defined) loyalty should be given the choice to walk all locations in a land
 - in a hidden location there is no chat
 - in a hidden location you cannot be use tools
 - in a hidden location, idling or going offline or going online without enough loyalty would move you along the hidden choices to the first location not hidden

7. timing the hiding / unhiding of locations
 - checking for valid candidates for hidding should occur every hour
 - only one hidding should occur per land
 - a hiding should not occur withing less then 8 hours away from the previous hiding / unhiding in the same land
 - unhiding a location should occur at moving as viscosity drops

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like this for couple of reasons. This would lower down the chances to grind volition which is already limited with it's ~1h cooldown per scene. Another reason is this would speed up traveling which is completly against the concept of positive viscosity and that is to slow it down. Not to mention that skipping/jumping the scenes could be confusing for newbies. Many locations can't be skipped, what if you really want to go to one of those locations that is now hidden? What if hidden location has a clicky you need for quest, altar, recruting center, specific resource to harvest, crossroad, shop or info hub? When you rule out all scenes that have at least one of those things, you don't really leave much scenes to hide/jump-over. Then what if you are going to that location and it's hidden but yet you go there because of some personal/rp reason and now you can't because it's hidden?

 

Although your suggestion speeds up lowering of viscosity and in theory enables faster unlocking of scenes, I just don't see it working. This will in fact probably demotivate people even more not to move rather than move, at least in my opinion. Even if it's true that MD has way too much scenes than players, I still think that all those scenes that ain't visited "because of viscosity" could become easily accessible if there is constant motivation for players to travel. I honestly don't see much motivation for players to move from the central hub of the realm. Non recurring stuff like acquiring papers, first time exploration and occasional quests will motivate you to travel, on regular basis however you aren't required to, the little life there is, is stationed in central part of realm, so fighting/training and social stuff happens there. People will travel if they need to reach specific altar once a week (although after getting max principles which you acquire fast you no longer care which altar you are using), or if they need to recruit their next batch of trees. Exception to this are people like you, the harvesters. Harvesters are players who obtained the tools and are dedicated to regularly gathering resources across the realm, and since tools even though there are shared ones ain't that easy to get and even if you get them it will take way too much time and effort to gather little bits that are left by "big guys" than it's worth. Other than this group of people there isn't any need RECURRING need to travel. That is the real problem. If there was more reason to travel, one that's reliable, in my opinion even this small playerbase we have would be able to "kill" of viscosity for good. I said reliable reason, because resource gathering isn't reliable, since usually newer player won't find anything left, older players already have stable access to tools, have more ap, gather more at once and "know the drill". Don't get me wrong I ain't picking on resource gathering, I'm saying that if player isn't harvester he doesn't have the reccuring need of traveling beyond the central hub.

 

Create the stable recurring need for traveling and viscosity problem won't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Viscosity may be a measure of activity in a given location, alas, it is hardly a neutral tool. Those locations more often visited become more prone to being visited, whereas those locations least visited become less prone to be visited. In sum, it is a measure of activity, but it is also a radicalizing factor; more importantly, it is a radicalizing factor created with a purpose in mind.

 

Visiting locations for no reason other than the removal of viscosity, it should go without saying, is to wholly miss the point. Viscosity has a purpose, and that is not movement for the sake of movement; if the community truly finds viscosity to be thus disruptive to the point they openly try and lower it merely for the sake of lowering it, and do so successfully, then viscosity is no longer fulfilling its role, and may as well be removed.

 

Whereas initiative already exists, specially in the compulsory newbie path (the de facto removal of viscosity in No Man's Land)¹, one such a initiative has, ultimately, taken on a limited scope.

 

If the difficulties of viscosity are to be tackled in accordance to their purpose, then autonomous reasons for players to visit a greater range of locations, possibly motivated by viscosity, but ultimately serving another purpose, must be created; that is to say, widespread zones of interest must be created or reinforced, rather than artificially generated travel. 

 

Here, player activity and the size of the player base are determinant, of course, and therefore one such a notion might sound much too romantic. Yet still, the creation or revival of said zones of interest and the enlargement of the player base should, presumably, go hand in hand.

 

More specifically, to hide locations based on viscosity, rather than simply have them be suitably hard to access, is to ignore both the purpose inherent to each location and that of viscosity. Viscosity was not created to be a problem in and of itself, or so I am led to believe, but rather, merely a symptom and motivator.

 

To say otherwise is to claim viscosity is a counterproductive mechanism, arbitrarily introduced and devoid of purpose. Some, or many, may share that view, but those who do would do better to altogether argue against viscosity, rather than support a patchwork job.

 

¹here, whereas one might still argue that the purpose of viscosity was deconstructed, it could also be said that another superseding criteria, the navigability of the immediate early game and its influence in the captivation and inflow of players, held more sway, as is only sensible. 

Edited by Azthor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uf, long sentences. I hate them.

 

First of all, it is not about the gathering. I consider myself one of the biggest gatherers in MD and I considered the impact on my activity.

I am not interested here to help ppl to travel to specific places for gathering resources or to help quest makers. For that I proposed another feature : Viscosity and "heavy" travel.

 

Also, this feature will slowly decrease the lands and I mean that it could take months to remove everything within a land.

This is not a solution for viscosity but to bring ppl together to try to solve the lack of interaction in MD. Before GG & Necro being opened and long before LotE's idea, all ppl were concentrated in NML, LR, UG & MB/MDA. It was still a huge place but it was less then half of what it is right now.

 

Also, by hiding resources or click-ables might provoke those interested in traveling there to un-hide them.

 

As you said: right now there is no incentive to travel to remove viscosity. This feature is just that : an incentive.

What do you think that Necro will do if by chance the Inner Necro will get opened because of such "hiding" ? Or what will LR do if their capital will no longer be available  and you could only go from entrance to the exit ?

 

So, this "Magic of lands" is not to deconstruct viscosity but to complete it. If ppl is not interested in some locations ... then ... we don't need those locations.

During BHC or a land war or a scheduled land show (with a large amount of ppl), all the land would go back to its former length due to activity and all access will be restored thus magically showing itself in all its glory.

Edited by No one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For many people it doesn't affect their gameplay if viscosity is high across the realm because they still don't need to move away from central hub. Speaking for myself this feature would offer zero incentive for me to travel. If there wasn't a need for me to go to those scenes now this feature won't magically change it. Just because if scene became unaccessible it won't make me move in order to make it accessible especially not since I have nothing to gain from it, it won't benefit me in any way or hurt me. Didn't need it so far, won't need it if this gets implemented, access to all those scenes to which I don't go is an unused luxury (if we apply the rules and limitations from original post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must concede insofar as that any given organized activity towards the removal of viscosity, however artificially so, still partially fulfills the purpose of viscosity.

 

Yet still, viscosity has a goal others than its own removal, or the only reasonable argument that could be made would be the removal of its entirety. While the reduction of the perceivable game world is a powerful threat, it is one that is more likely to be answered by an immediate approach, travel for the sake of reducing viscosity, rather than a purpose-oriented one, the enrichment of those locations that lack activity. At best.

 

Here, viscosity is being seem as a disease where it is but a symptom; either the actual problem is deemed unmanageable and viscosity must be removed, or it is deemed manageable and those initiatives necessary are put forth. Viscosity is only fulfilling its role when it is being a bother, and can only be considered to have fulfilled that role when it no longer holds any sway. If the suppression of viscosity depends on activities that would cease with its end, then it is not a solution.

 

Your point of view as expressed in "If ppl is not interested in some locations ... then ... we don't need those location" is an entirely valid one, alas, I'd rather believe that every given scene has a purpose, may or not have those individuals who are attached to them, and may or not hold allure to a new player. To hide a scene is to castrate the game, and though those individuals that are fond of a given area might try and push activity its way, some scenes may altogether fade from the perception of younger players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Your point of view as expressed in "If ppl is not interested in some locations ... then ... we don't need those location" is an entirely valid one, alas, I'd rather believe that every given scene has a purpose, may or not have those individuals who are attached to them, and may or not hold allure to a new player. To hide a scene is to castrate the game, and though those individuals that are fond of a given area might try and push activity its way, some scenes may altogether fade from the perception of younger players.

but as a young player, I am GLAD that there are scenes I can not view yet.  It keeps me coming back every day to try my hand at other things, to talk to players, to learn, to be patient, to try quests while I wait to improve in vital energy, action points, etc.  I accept that the game is set the way it is for a purpose.  And perhaps that is the point - if players can not accept the parameters, then do we really want them to be a part of MD?  Nothing good in life is free.  Just sayin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only concur, last part aside.Thus, either I've expressed myself in a dubious manner or one of us has misunderstood the other.

 

To hamper access to a scene until the player has enough action points and/or resources, in the broadest sense, to access it, that I approve of, exactly having in view that viscosity was designed as it was with a purpose in mind. However, to hide a given scene is to outright deny an individual the chance to, by their own effort, gain access to said scene.

 

Though, here, the creation of an organized effort to reduce viscosity could be considered an extension of a personal effort to access an area, that then acquires, in and of itself, an undesirable side, as it sabotages, to a given extent, viscosity's inherent function¹.

 

In the long run, MagicDuel has filters of its own in the selection of new players. That can be misleading, still, in that even those temporary players who pass the game, only to leave it shortly after, play an integral part in the attraction of those players who might be selected by those filters.

 

¹unless, of course, motivated by viscosity, it still fulfills the criteria that allows it to persist as an activity in the absence of viscosity.

Edited by Azthor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[spoiler]

I must concede insofar as that any given organized activity towards the removal of viscosity, however artificially so, still partially fulfills the purpose of viscosity.

 

Yet still, viscosity has a goal others than its own removal, or the only reasonable argument that could be made would be the removal of its entirety. While the reduction of the perceivable game world is a powerful threat, it is one that is more likely to be answered by an immediate approach, travel for the sake of reducing viscosity, rather than a purpose-oriented one, the enrichment of those locations that lack activity. At best.

 

Here, viscosity is being seem as a disease where it is but a symptom; either the actual problem is deemed unmanageable and viscosity must be removed, or it is deemed manageable and those initiatives necessary are put forth. Viscosity is only fulfilling its role when it is being a bother, and can only be considered to have fulfilled that role when it no longer holds any sway. If the suppression of viscosity depends on activities that would cease with its end, then it is not a solution.

 

Your point of view as expressed in "If ppl is not interested in some locations ... then ... we don't need those location" is an entirely valid one, alas, I'd rather believe that every given scene has a purpose, may or not have those individuals who are attached to them, and may or not hold allure to a new player. To hide a scene is to castrate the game, and though those individuals that are fond of a given area might try and push activity its way, some scenes may altogether fade from the perception of younger players.

[/spoiler]

As Ary said, there are ppl that are not impacted by viscosity because they don't move. That is true, then they haven't seen the extent of this game.

 

And Azthor summarized it nicely : "viscosity is being seem as a disease where it is but a symptom". But the issue is not the viscosity but the lack of interaction.

I don't like "castrating" MD, but it seems that we are so few and so far away that we no longer enjoying this game.

 

In the past few years, I grew to become a sort of a monk. I don't like staying at GoE just to talk to ppl  yet I miss their presence around MD.

 

Indeed, maybe Viscosity is a problem, maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I risk deviating a little off-topic, alas, it might be  a necessary deviation. Let it be a temporary one. Excuse me, No one.

 

High viscosity and the lack of interaction should not be mistaken for a common issue, even if they find a common root in the lack of activity. Viscosity adversely affects interaction in remote locations by suppressing activity inflow to those locations; as a radicalizing factor, viscosity is bred by a deficit in global activity, and further fueled by itself. High viscosity tends to create viscosity. Viscosity does not, however, affect global activity unless by harming player interest in the game, and that can be argued.

 

The lack of interaction as a whole, on the other hand, finds its common factor with viscosity in that it is also influenced by global activity. Should viscosity be considered to have adversely affected global activity, then it has also influenced global interaction indirectly. However, it is a direct consequence of viscosity only in those remote or not so remote locations that suffer from high viscosity in the first place.

 

That taken in account, what must be highlighted is that, in addition to that common root of global inactivity, they also have their respective, separate causes. High viscosity is further fueled by the lack  of attractives for it to be overcome in those locations that already receive little to no travel. Interaction, on the other hand, though I lack the knowledge to make a certain statement, may or not have other causes deeply ingrained within the community.

 

Thus, I propose two distinct questions: is the lack of a concentration of players in a scene what is hampering interaction, or does the problem lie elsewhere? Is viscosity directly hampering the inflow of new players and permanency of those current ones, and if so, does it constitute a danger spiral?

Edited by Azthor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I risk deviating a little off-topic, alas, it might be  a necessary deviation. Let it be a temporary one. Excuse me, No one.

 

High viscosity and the lack of interaction should not be mistaken for a common issue, even if they find a common root in the lack of activity. Viscosity adversely affects interaction in remote locations by suppressing activity inflow to those locations; as a radicalizing factor, viscosity is bred by a deficit in global activity, and further fueled by itself. High viscosity tends to create viscosity. Viscosity does not, however, affect global activity unless by harming player interest in the game, and that can be argued.

 

The lack of interaction as a whole, on the other hand, finds its common factor with viscosity in that it is also influenced by global activity. Should viscosity be considered to have adversely affected global activity, then it has also influenced global interaction indirectly. However, it is a direct consequence of viscosity only in those remote or not so remote locations that suffer from high viscosity in the first place.

 

That taken in account, what must be highlighted is that, in addition to that common root of global inactivity, they also have their respective, separate causes. High viscosity is further fueled by the lack  of attractives for it to be overcome in those locations that already receive little to no travel. Interaction, on the other hand, though I lack the knowledge to make a certain statement, may or not have other causes deeply ingrained within the community.

 

Thus, I propose two distinct questions: is the lack of a concentration of players in a scene what is hampering interaction, or does the problem lie elsewhere? Is viscosity directly hampering the inflow of new players and permanency of those current ones, and if so, does it constitute a danger spiral?

I have to totally agree with Azkhael on this.  And the answers are the problem lies elsewhere, and Yes I know that vis has to be hampering new players from having "fun" and I don't hardly leave GOE now with the Vis.  vis was fine for war...but makes the game alot less active and also less fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

viscosity is a gold mine for the gameplay, it makes secret areas that are forgotten and gives a way to create activity centers for groups of people. It might not fit well with just a handfull of people in md now, but i won't change that. Viscosity gives value to places that otherwise would have been ordinary. It makes resource gathering a challenge, and encourages group play. The alternative to viscosity is to close down a large part of md so the remaining part will fit to the existing number of active players,...but viscosity solves that in an other more dynamic way..those areas self-close while still giving any group of players the ability to open them.

 

Its uncomfortable, yes, so what.

 

If i am wrong about all this, i will expect a clearer more aware explenation from either council, chew, or kings..

why? because if there is someone that will convince me to chance my concepts about how i want md to be, then they should be people that reach a certain rank in this invisible hierarchy.

 

That doesn't mean at all that your views are insignificant or useless, they are actually very valuable, but they need to change the mind of other people before they will change my mind in any way... and i am talkinng strictly about viscosity case for now.

 

There is also a research related issue here, viscosity and fenths, separation from reality by forgetting the surroundings, etc... the people i mentioned could talk to me about all this in a way i could explain in more detail the meaning of viscosity, and maybe find a more suitable way to integrate it IF needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[spoiler]

viscosity is a gold mine for the gameplay, it makes secret areas that are forgotten and gives a way to create activity centers for groups of people. It might not fit well with just a handfull of people in md now, but i won't change that. Viscosity gives value to places that otherwise would have been ordinary. It makes resource gathering a challenge, and encourages group play. The alternative to viscosity is to close down a large part of md so the remaining part will fit to the existing number of active players,...but viscosity solves that in an other more dynamic way..those areas self-close while still giving any group of players the ability to open them.

 

Its uncomfortable, yes, so what.

 

If i am wrong about all this, i will expect a clearer more aware explenation from either council, chew, or kings..

why? because if there is someone that will convince me to chance my concepts about how i want md to be, then they should be people that reach a certain rank in this invisible hierarchy.

 

That doesn't mean at all that your views are insignificant or useless, they are actually very valuable, but they need to change the mind of other people before they will change my mind in any way... and i am talkinng strictly about viscosity case for now.

 

There is also a research related issue here, viscosity and fenths, separation from reality by forgetting the surroundings, etc... the people i mentioned could talk to me about all this in a way i could explain in more detail the meaning of viscosity, and maybe find a more suitable way to integrate it IF needed.

[/spoiler]

Unfortunately, I can only agree with you. It is a "gold mine" and it does create those activity centers.
But you are missing the point, viscosity is not a real challenge in gathering resources, not for me , not anymore. I have a routine and it fits my needs. I manage.

And ... yes, "Viscosity gives value to places that otherwise would have been ordinary" , but nobody goes to LotE/tribunal anymore, it is almost impossible to get them there. Also, by allowing the land to shift, it will just make it even more mysterious. It will allow the access to remote locations but it will hide the path. If you want to see ALL locations, you have to work for it.

 

I proposed a feature to allow me (and others willing to do so) to lower the viscosity : Viscosity and "heavy" travel. It would solve the current "issues" with viscosity and with the proposal from this topic. But on top of all, it will grant the ability to make this land accessible again if we are willing to do so.

 

 

PS: I'd like to know other opinions on this viscosity and even the research / opinion of "the people mur mentioned".

 

MD is slowly slipping away and we have ppl researching stuff in secret. MD needs your feedback and ideas.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you guys / girls for your support. But is it still off-topic.

Coming back to Mur:

why? because if there is someone that will convince me to chance my concepts about how i want md to be, then they should be people that reach a certain rank in this invisible hierarchy.

 

 

I see a few problems with Mur's request :

 - unless MD is meant to be a rock, MD has to change and often and in attractive ways and for that we could use the experience everyone has (even from other games)

 - you have to be available for discussions and more open minded for others to have a change to just present their case even without any interest

 

I think that I read this wrong:

The alternative to viscosity is to close down a large part of md so the remaining part will fit to the existing number of active players,...but viscosity solves that in an other more dynamic way..those areas self-close while still giving any group of players the ability to open them.

Are you agreeing with my proposal ? or ... please explain your statement.

Even if I am indeed wrong. I'd like to know your pro/con arguments.

 

As a matter of fact, this is what everybody should do : write pro/con arguments for every proposed features without responding to someone's arguments.

 

So: please write your pro/con arguments on this feature or simply write any feedback .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I have thought about this for a few days and think I have the right words for how I feel about the topic.  

I tried not to sound like I'm "sucking up to Mur", but I agree wit him very strongly on one aspect of Viscosity.

 

It all boils down to MD is MD.   Certain archetypal truths about the world are part of the "physics" of the game, such as "you fight wit hcreatures against other players", and "you have a regen timer to recover stuff".

Viscosity fits into this mold.  It is the fabric of the world, for better or worse, and I do not fee lit is "for worse".

 

Yes, viscosity is high in "distant" lands, and it's one thing to say "just walk there more" but human nature shows us that doesn't tend to happen.   This isn't "wrong" in the sense of the game, it's "Inconvenient" in terms of the people in it.

 

Look what happens when new Quests get implemented in distant clickies.  Suddenly, the viscosity there all but vanishes.  I've seen it happen more than twice, so know it was not a fluke.  It's a reward-based effect getting people "over in that other scene", but the deeper "problem" of Viscosity solved itself through it's own functionality.  No need to change it now.

Want proof of this, make a clickie-quest that requires people to move between Awiiya's Way and the Aramory alternately, and often.  Give It a WP reward and I can guess that in no time even a new player could grab papers on day one as the gates "fall open" from us active questers. (AP maths may not quite add up to truly allow new-new players, but the MDA gates would still get remarkably "open")

 

 

MD is our world too, and malleable for some features and functionalities, but the core "Principles" of fenths, Heat, Viscosity, and such, are in my mind unchanging.  They define the world, just like Gravity and electromagnetic forces define ours.  we can harness those tools/features in many ways to make things like space ships and computers, and gardens and snowmen, but "Gravity" won't change just because you don't like tripping down a steep hill.  We can only make sure staircases are a comfortable and convenient size, or invent the Wheel to help move along without falling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, we can use the Wheel. But I guess that we still have to find / invent it in MD.

 

And I disagree with you on the viscosity vs quest matter. Ok, it works, in the first day or even first week . When most ppl completed the quest ... what will happen then ?

True, the quest is a temporary & almost quick solution but it is not a solution that would last.

 

Thank you Maebius for the input. It is well appreciated.

 

-------------------------------------

So: please write your pro/con arguments on this feature or simply write any feedback .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will give the pro's and con's on your initial idea:

 

Pro's:

It would be great to add a certain kind of mystery around MD and it will help traveling faster through MD. But I don't like the idea personaly, because I want to get to every scene without skipping one; the full journey!
 
Con's:
It helps traveling, but as Ary said there is no reason to travel. I think that that is the problem and not the concept of viscocity. If players want to move and viscocity is still a pain, then we have to doubt viscocity. But MD should focus more on wanting to travel, then make traveling easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, we can use the Wheel. But I guess that we still have to find / invent it in MD.

 

And I disagree with you on the viscosity vs quest matter. Ok, it works, in the first day or even first week . When most ppl completed the quest ... what will happen then ?

True, the quest is a temporary & almost quick solution but it is not a solution that would last.

 

Sorry No One, I think you may have misunderstood.  I did not mean to say that "questing will cure Viscosity".  I was using it as an example of how a tool/action can temporarily 'solve' the problem.  The fact it is temporary is due to the players, but Viscosity is part of the Land/Realm.  I don't want to change it at all.   

 

To use my Gravity analogy again, it's part of the world.  Building a jet aeroplane or balloon doesn't change Gravity, it lets us bypass it temporarily. 

Likewise, questing may bypass Viscosity issue for a time.  Just as basic  "random walking around" does. 

However, Your idea seems to fundamentally change how Viscosity 'works' by collapsing paths and "Folding the Cube", the way I am reading it, and I would disagree with that.

 

I would like Pro-Con, but Rikstar said pretty much exactly what I would have.

Pro: dynamic is interesting, and would encourage interaction to "unlock" scenes.  It's something New, until the new factor fades.

 

Con:  I want all scenes open except a few that are locked by Story/Key (GG lab,  Angien Shrine, Oak Tower, etc etc) and this effectively locks "regular" scenes that I may want to visit.   Plus, no reason to travel if the realm shrinks even further. So will be a self-supporting collapse.

Edited by Maebius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  I don't think any of us wish to detract from Mur's vision of MD...I haven't always appreciate aspects of what he does in MD right away...but I have learned that over time I come to appreciate it. 

 

   If Viscosity is here to stay...I suggest that those of us that are concerned about it's negative affects should do something about it.  Perhaps what we need is to form a guild to open lands/scenes closed by vis.  That way we can keep lands scenes open, but not all at once, and not all the time.  Vis can still function to keep remote areas less accessable and allow group centers for interaction, while at the same time, we do not lose parts of our realm to a lack of travel.  It would also allow new players the opportunity to vist areas oncethey have been opened by the guild. 

 

  No One all but said this in his comments above.  So... I nominate No One to lead it. (never gets old)  :D      How about.... "Trailblazers Guild"?

Edited by Blackthorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you ask me the viscosity is not the problem here - it's the mindset that so many people adopt nowadys that's the real problem. Let me explain what i mean with that :D Viscosity doen's really make travell harder. All you have to do to move from one scene to another is click that little arrow. The only thing viscosity does is take a few additional action points away from you which makes you run out of ap faster. This means you will have to wait a few minutes to regenerate it if you are travelling to a very distant land (which is exactly the same as in RL where you have to rest every now and then if you are walking a long distance). The problem is how people seem to see that as something bad - as if it pained them to rest a bit every now and then. You wake up, you HURRY to work, at work you RUSH to finish before your deadline (maybe that term is the problem - DEADline sounds so... well deadly), you HURRY back home and when you finnaly settle down in front of your computer to relax after a stressfull day you start complaining how you can't run around MD fast enough. Just take your time people :) enjoy the scenery, talk to someone (you can still send a PM if noone is around), write something in the chat (RP a little maybe) for the next unsuspecting wanderer to see, think up an idea for a new quest that involves the scene you're "stuck" on, you can even walk away from your pc (what an outrageous idea that is, right?) and put on some nice music so the time goes by faster,... and most importantly remember that the only time when you really need to be fast in MD is when you enter a race - and what fun would a race be without anything to slow people down?

 

 

p.s. i know this might sound lika a rant, but my goal is not to offend anyone (and i'm really sorry if anyone feels offended) i just wish to help people change their perspective to a slightly more "easy-going" one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Forum Statistics

    15,831
    Total Topics
    173,481
    Total Posts
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Recent Event Reviews

×
×
  • Create New...