Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Zyrxae

  1. If you cannot attend at one of the times specified (12 & 18 ST), or a member of the Public Council is not present/awake at the Tranquil Plains at one of those times, you can still share a story with those present. Regardless of the time, you are very strongly encouraged to log your story on this topic. Hope to see you there!


    EDIT: Now with logs!

  2. How it seems to work currently:


    - Walking through +40 visc gives .08 volition

    - Walking through a scene with between +38 and -78 visc gives .02 volition

    if your step lowers the viscosity in the scene (that is, if you haven't walked in the scene in the past hour). If you have walked there too recently, you gain no volition.


    - Walking through -80 visc gives .01 volition

    no matter how recently you have walked in the scene.


    This holds true no matter your land loyalty or whether you're walking through your homeland, giving an advantage to people with loyalty in large, rarely traveled lands.

  3. Why not just: If you take a step through viscosity and there are non-idle people your scene or in an adjacent one, you gain volition according to how many people there are and the amount of visc on your scene?


    Members of an expedition group would each face a tradeoff at each scene: "Should I take the first step and lose a lot of AP but gain more volition, or should I wait for others to clear the way and get less volition?" which they could work out among themselves.

  4. A major issue with volition as it stands now is that the bonus for moving through max visc discourages people from walking in teams.

    Conceptually, a group working together to 'remember' a place does so more effectively than can an individual (like how groups often develop transactive memory, meaning roughly that their members can cue each other to remember ideas that they would have more difficulty recalling without the group's help.) To fit this principle, and also to encourage group expeditions to the Archives or the East, how about giving a bonus to volition for groups of people combating viscosity together?


    - The larger the group, the more volition gained (at most +.01 volition per step per extra person on the scene/adjacent scene)

    - The greater the viscosity, the more volition gained (for example, +.04 volition for 40 visc, +.032 for 32 visc...+.008 for 8 visc..etc.)

    - Walking alone through viscosity in areas where you have plenty of loyalty would not increase your volition, but walking in a group on those same areas would increase volition a little. (A long-time Golemian wouldn't gain volition just walking through their homeland, but they would gain a little volition while leading a tour through GG.)



    [log='Conceptual question:']One of these statements more accurately reflects the concept of volition than the other, but I'm not sure which:
    - Working in a group allows people to effect more change than they could alone—>working in a group should give you more volition, because volition is about how you can use your will to greatest effect.
    - It takes less effort for an individual to effect a given amount of change as part of a group than alone—>working alone should give you more volition, because volition is about how much effort you put in.[/log]

  5. The >>>s are from the original post, the normal text is from Chew, and these are my responses. (Not trying to hog space for myself; we've been discussing different subjects, just not all of them are so public):

    >>>While you hold a torch, your Torch Team replaces your alliance page (although you remain a member of your current alliance.)
    Possibly, although there needs to be some reason to have this page showing, what will it display?
    The core concept behind this: while you're on a torch team, your loyalty to the team overtakes your other allegiances.
    >>>While on the same scene as a teammate, the General has the power to take away that teammate's torch
    What is the reasoning for this? Torchs can be discarded at capital.
    If the General believed a team member to have been disloyal, or had some other strategic reason not to want that person on their team (liability issue/wanted to use them as a scout/etc.), they could kick that member.
    >>>Alliance chat would be team chat
    Comes close to "global chat" and mur doesnt like this, further reasoning may be needed for this
    At least partially balanced in that players would lose access to alliance chat while on a team, thus trading one system of 'global chat' for another. I don't imagine that teams would greatly exceed the size of large alliances, and 50-seat alliances were implemented, which at least theoretically would have allowed 50 people to talk to each other from anywhere.
    >>>"Jump to leader" would jump you to the General
    Much too abusive, would break the whole point of moving through the high AP. I trust you know that during TC you prettymuch lose all of your AP each time you move? I dont know if you guys have actually played TC.
    I've played, not sure about others, and from what I've read from forum feedback, people jumping to their alliance leaders during TC made for good strategy and wasn't overly unbalanced.*

    The idea here is a shift toward promoting team play over individual torch-running and enabling participation even on the part of non-fighters. Theoretically, Generals could invite someone to the team without having them bear a torch. They would have access to the team's alliance interface and be able to coordinate movements with the team, but act as spies by walking torchless into enemy land.

    >>>The closer you are to the enemy capital, the more AP needed to take a step.
    - While on enemy territory, have the amount of AP needed to take a step while holding a torch be based on the number of steps needed to reach the capital of the land you're trespassing on, from your current scene.
    Again, dont know if you have played TC, tweaking the AP requirements and such would be needed for the new AP changes of all the lands.
    Which factors would need to be considered in tweaking the AP requirements? Would the total amount of AP needed to move from a land's gate to its capital need to be about equal for all the lands?
    >>>The more people bearing torches of the land you're trying to score against that you kill, the greater your score when you reach that land's capital.
    Possible, but needs additional data to be added to the storage, since currently it only tracks number of kills. Could be an addition for later.
    Ok. It seems fitting that killing someone trying to defend the land you’re attacking would hurt that land more than killing any old torchbearer.

    * Chew's reply to this:

    It was entirely unbalanced... That was the primary problem with the TC, people jumping around bypassed all loyalty and became a game of "who can get most people jumping into capital at once"

  6. It's actually debatable in my mind if this use of alt accounts should be allowed at all, but I'll leave it to the PC if they want to do anything.

    You may not take actions on one of your accounts that another of your accounts is able to gain direct profit from. Profiting can be in the form of reputation...

    That's always been a tricky one, but since this outfit benefits (or degrades) Bookie's reputation and not Andur's (he's merely posting here for Bookie), I don't see the harm. RP-wise, it seems like Andur decided not to run the contest again but did inspire Bookie to fill the void. With a name like Bookie, you'd almost have to..
    It will help Bookie's case (and be more fun) if he has a life and personality outside of this operation, though.

    1. resources add up and cannot be split, you'll have to know this when you split the rewards

    Good point; you may want to encourage each person who bets something unsplittable to bet a type of thing that hasn't already been bet.

    2. 1st-2nd place should be "the closest" to that number. Otherwise you can rename this to "lottery" / "bingo" as there will be very little chances to get within the ±4  interval

    It happened last time; who's to say it won't again?

    Scoring: 1st place - a difference of 2 between guessed number and submitted value. ( ±2 )
    2nd place - a difference higher than 2 and less than 4 included ( ±4 ) - ( ±2 )
    3rd place - there is NO third place.
    Winners will recieve 90% of the gathered rewards (summed up).

    So if, say, 3 people get 1st place and 2 get second, the pot will be divided into 8 shares: 2 each for the first place winners and 1 each for the second placers?

  7. We're currently looking at possible changes to the Torch Contest. Some ideas are below, as well as some previous topics for reference.


    A generals sword allows you to join the Torch Contest for a land you are not a member of. You must convince them that you are loyal and then be sworn into their service at the capital location.

    While you hold a torch, your Torch Team replaces your alliance page (although you remain a member of your current alliance.)
    - While on the same scene as a teammate, the General has the power to take away that teammate's torch
    - Alliance chat would be team chat
    - "Jump to leader" would jump you to the General

    The closer you are to the enemy capital, the more AP needed to take a step.
    - While on enemy territory, have the amount of AP needed to take a step while holding a torch be based on the number of steps needed to reach the capital of the land you're trespassing on, from your current scene.

    The more people bearing torches of the land you're trying to score against that you kill, the greater your score when you reach that land's capital.
    - For example, if you're from GG and you're trying to score at Raven Hold, killing people with LR torches will count double as much as killing people bearing torches of other lands. If you later decide to score at Wind's Sanctuary instead (without scoring or having been killed), then your kills of MB torchbearers will count double as much as your kills of non-MB torchbearers.


    Other torch idea topics: 1, 2, 3, others?


    More ideas are welcome and can be split into other topics as the discussion warrants.

  8. ..When you remember your UID better than another important ID number.
    Timezones now come naturally to you.
    You catch yourself right before saying "It's like the search for the Book of Principles" or referencing the resolution of the Shade War—aloud.
    Historicity overall seems like so much Ancient Lore.
    You see 'Syrian rebels' in the news and immediately wonder what kind of falling-out could have happened with Azull.

  9. I voted no, and would be interested to see what reasons people might have had for voting 'yes' besides wanting to be able to find people more easily.



    dst's idea could be a new shop feature for the mood panel or the Online Users list (not sure which is better): click "Set your location" to be able to state your location, in your own words or using current coordinates (coordinates would NOT change automatically if you change locations), and people could mouseover your name/status to see where you've said that you are.

  10. 1) For explanation's sake:

    Friends in shop list is already a issue in my point of view. Being able to message anyone any place is NOT what i want. Geographic factor, like "you go far away to hide from someone" should be possible. Characters should be able to get "lost" or people to forget about them just because they no longer see traces of them. People that stay in a place build around them sort of their own "home", that "home" would have no meaning , if you can poke and talk to someone from any place without entering his "Home". See this as how telephones ruined the personal communication in RL..if you get what i mean.

    from here.



    Nice but at this very moment quite useless. I am still waiting the day when their original intended use will be finished.


    [spoiler]Ann. 1556 - [2010-07-16 03:03:37 - Stage 10]
    Bestiary....Comes with a secret (undocumented) feature, related to illusions.[/spoiler]

  11. When editing a message or a personal paper, often when I switch to another tab and back again, the message or document I've been working on seizes up such that I can't continue to add or delete anything in the message; trying to type there gives the standard system alert noise. (The insertion point blinks like normal.) Clicking on the border area in the same frame as the message sometimes is enough to make it editable again, sometimes not.


    The more time I spend in another tab/program, the more likely the freezing, although it still seems fairly random. It happens most often while editing clickables and never when I'm editing the message/paper in a separate tab, and it occurs in Firefox but not Chrome.

  12. If you haven't yet received something you had been promised through an event such as the Personal Request Month, the most recent birthday, or another (administratively sponsored) quest, post here:

    - Your playername
    - Your player ID
    - The reward you're seeking
    - A quote showing you deserve your reward, with a link to the post the quote is from


    and you should get your rewards sooner rather than later. Please do keep in mind the overall busyness of our coders in this process; your patience is just as appreciated as your assertiveness.



    Edit: Likely places of interest:

    Selfish Wishes Granted

    This year's birthday outcomes


    Quest results forum

    Birthday contests forum

  13. This would seem to go well with..[shameless plug]

    In the citizen voting area, in our capitals, there is a section for active citizens. What if that list also showed the amount of land loyalty each citizen has? I'm not sure how difficult that would be to code, but there are things like that, that update regularly. Is it possible to make it update everyday, same time as the server update without affecting the activity status?

    Could make it easier to tell who voted how about whose citizenship, but then there's always room for a little error (not knowing what day people voted, people missing AD between voting and final vote-counting).


    Might it be better to just show people's approximate loyalty, either by having the list sortable by loyalty (w/ option to switch back to the ID-sorted default) or showing a bar graph of people's loyalty as with the rebel system?

  14. I had an idea to gather solar energy during the sunny weather in a form of heat. Make sort of hybrid between heat jar and improvised rain collector - "solar energy collector". Could be an alternative way to gather some heat especially for young players with low stats.

    Interesting..pushes the boundary between 'real' heat and MD heat as expression of human interest/activity. The missing link here seems to be the ability for people in sufficient numbers to affect realm-wide weather..How might this work?

  15. A huge difference between MD and reality is that the authorities in MD aren't so much concerned with enforcing social rules (like RL police) as tasked with keeping the reality of the realm intact. 'Killing' (although really it's more like 'being dishonored to the point of such shame and dejection that a friend must seek help to restore your spirits') does nothing to violate the boundary between MD and RL, whereas actions that violate the official rules (bug/alt abuse..) generally do.

    MD authorities are more the equivalent of gods than regular police in terms of both their powers and their duties.

    We have chosen a natural way of life rather than a civilised way of life. Why conduct polls then? Why aim for justice?

    Because we have the freedom to choose to do so. I've heard a lot of disgruntled chatter about killings, and yet have heard of no trade or even physical embargoes between unhappy parties' lands or alliances.

    To punish someone, either subject them to a situation they dislike or prevent them from getting what they want.

    What is it that the killers want? What would they hate most?

  16. Feel free to read whatever political motivations into this, but "The forum voting system will be used to vote" is a bit vague, so..


    Should we be able to vote for, say, first through sixth place, or our main four candidates plus three alternates?

    The more slots, the more consensus candidates are favored over highly polar ones.

  17. Apologies for not responding to Maeb's own idea; I don't have enough bad experiences with huge arrays to dislike them. But I do like the topic, so..


    Something on the resource balancing topic reminded me of an old project that might be useful to someone: a Market clickable to facilitate trade of resources and small items between players.


    Main: Welcome to the Market, etc

    Options: Browse, Sell, Search



    Form that asks:

    - ITC, with option to add more ITCs

    - Location: where seller says they can usually be found

    - When the sale will end, in terms of days from now or as a calendar date

    and collects

    - uv('name') -- the seller's name, not the item owner's, in case the item owner wants to have someone else handle the selling for them

    - uv('land') -- the item owner's land

    with Submit button.



    Table with columns Seller, Land, Items (dropdown list of items they’ve put up for sale), Location, Ends (when the seller has said their sale would end (Should this display as a calendar date or in terms of days from the current date?))

    Hopefully item/resource images could be incorporated into this somehow, to make the market feel more real/present.



    - Select the item you’re looking for from a drop-down list of items currently being sold

    Cons--doesn’t make sense, doesn’t feel realistic

    Pros--more people might use the market


    I originally stopped working on this because it seemed like no one would use it, so any ideas that would incline you to use it (or really any in general) would be especially welcome.

  18. He wants the reason he comes to be (or at least feel) genuine, as though he's not coming because of this 'quest' but as though it never existed.



    Hint, hint: don't put your attempts on this topic if you want to win, because that will remind him...but if you somehow did win by putting them here...gosh, cows would fly.

  19. It's been said before, but some of MD's most dedicated players haven't been 'traditional' gamers.* To attract more artists, try promoting MD on deviantart-like sites you're already on. Writers, coders, and people who don't fit into "-ers" often are known on other sites; emphasizing the respectively attractive parts of the realm (Story Night & other quests, coding your own clickables..) to different groups, or having some of the banners already available to paste into your signatures on those sites adjusted to specifically emphasize the features of MD that would appeal to those groups, might also bring in more people.


    *BFH/others: What about a survey of how people got to MD? Would be more informative if it's not anonymous, could include a questions like "What do you usually do in MD?" with checkboxes for fighting, RP, solving quests, making quests, art.., along with the usual "when did you come", "did you leave, if so about how long", etc.


    More ambitious, long-term, mp8: Imagine finding a flyer in your local coffee shop that led you scavenger-hunting around town, and the final destination was MD itself...

    Could be made many times easier if a group here designs the 'quest' and fine-tunes it for their respective hometowns.

  20. The gathering system is perfect as it is. You can gather the resources when you want to maximum efficiency or prevent others to gather them. And it was like that since the beginning.
    If I remember Mur's words, the gathering should not be impended (if I am not mistaken).

    The gathering system is not perfect as it is.

    And to be clear, this is not a "how can we prevent No one & co from getting resources" topic, it's a "how can we make MD more realistic and create more opportunities ingame" topic.

    It is also not the former kind of topic hypocritically disguised as the latter.


    It makes some sense to me that the usage of a tool can lead to damage it.
    So at every use a tool should have a associated risk of damage

    I'm with Change, Miq, and dst that it makes sense that tools would get rusty from disuse, or from being outside in the rain. I don't think it makes much sense that a resource's level of depletion would significantly change the chance to damage the tool.

    New roles/groups involving tool repair also sound both realistic and a good way to facilitate role creation and player interaction. Smiths could also possibly create new tools, either land-tied or independent, for a WP and a fair amount of materials..


    Resources changing base amounts based on amount harvested also makes sense, within limits, and adds (literally!) another dimension to the tragedy of the commons-type social experiment we have going already.
    [log="Details for wonks"]A 2D Gaussian curve like this one:
    first horizontal axis: base amount of resource, running from 0 to the max possible amount of that resource
    other horizontal axis: average amount of resource that week, running from 0 to the max possible amount of that resource (imagine slicing the above picture in half on a diagonal)
    vertical axis: amount of base resource change going into the next week, running from 0 to maybe a fifth of the max possible amount of that resource[/log]


    Beyond that, though—

    An important facet of the resource system is that each land has access to something the other lands cannot easily get themselves.
    No one, if you had something that the Water Dowsers wanted, but could not easily get, you could probably work out a deal.
    But as an Easterner you don't really have this: MB doesn't seem to need candies and herbs as much as you want water tools.

    Hopefully the coming changes will allow for more equitable trading by ensuring that no land(s) have too great an advantage over others.

  • Create New...