Just my Opinion
-
Like I said in another thread, I am personally of the opinion that empowering players to tell their own stories and create their own plots should be the primary agenda at the moment. Granted I am not particularily active anymore IG because of a heavy workload at school, but I think that more sandbox, more freedom is something that should have been done along time ago. We are talking amonst the team how to best implament it, but if players can share views in a nice and polite way thats the kind of feed back that is most certainly welcome.
-
Lizard Man really said it best of all the posts in this thread. Every player's "Golden Age" is based on some rose-colored lens that they remember the good times through. For me, I think COA V2/V3 were those golden days.
V1 was fun, but in my opinion, it was amateur and a bit too gamey. There was little if any intrigue and a lot of MMO type activities (farming xp, farming materials, etc.) seemed prevalent. There were also significant departures from "reality" like the every-so-often attack of "The Hulk". All of those things were entertaining, but they weren't deep and if there was depth in V1, I never experienced it first hand in roughly a year of playing.
V2 was a drastic change where roleplaying became more central and I played for the first part of this before being deployed and missing the last year. I remember it as a step up from V1 in what I was looking for, but if I recall, there were some issues that needed to be fixed and there was some sort of character level/power inflation.
V3 was what I, as a player, considered my "golden age". I felt the setting was very coherent and canon, and while players could make a difference, the impact they could make was limited to plausibility/reality of the environment. While you could eventually kill Norah the head of the Merciful Shield, it wasn't an easy proposition, it wasn't assured, and it took a long time to set up the perfect event that allowed it to transpire. Overthrowing the government and fabric of the realm was not something that a group of a few people was likely going to accomplish with enormous numbers of NPCs on various sides not necessarily going along with their exact plan. There were some fairly established DM factions that provided a little bit of room for what most people's play style was, but not necessarily allow any one player to run the world. Some people didn't like the restrictions, but I felt that the environment gave players an opportunity to influence the world in real, albeit not earth-shattering ways. The server tended to loosely revolve around fairly well-structured metaplots, with various sub-plots made by DMs and players. Overall, I felt there was a sense of continuity that may have been lost later on.
V4 seemed to come about because some players felt that the setting was too "structured" or "good" or "lawful" or whatever else they preferred to be opposite too. As a result, the world was turned upside down in a very short order. Old factions, even the entire government was overthrown, disbanded, cast away, and a new world emerged where just about anything was possible. The problem that I saw was that if everything is possible, chaos erupts and the ability of the DM team to provide continuity to the world is reduced. I played a bit in V4, and while it had its moments, I think it was overall less than it could be because of a drastic swing away from the perception of what V3 had become. V3 became whatever it was over a long time and V4 wiped that all away (without a wipe) in a seemingly short time. I felt we had thrown away the baby with the bath water and V4 became the end of my time on the server. If V3 was criticized for taking too long to make a change, V4's fault was changing too suddenly and too often.
I never played in V5 and so I have no opinion, but the strength that COA had in whatever "golden age" was the balance of interaction between good players and good DMs.
I think what really happened is the game shifted from being a well-structured backdrop, built and run by a team of DMs, with PCs being understudies looking for a small lead role, to a street theater where PCs all seemed to be the star of their own show that other people just happened to be on the stage for. The former model allowed players to be stars of an act or some scenes in the act, but not necessarily being Romeo or Juliet. When everyone became Romeo and Juliet, then the plays and supporting acts had to become shorter and shorter to let everyone be the main character and then it all became more and more disjointed.
These are just my opinions and I only share them because another player asked me to. They are my opinions and they are shaped by my own personal biases, such as my propensity to play long-term characters because I enjoy gradually developing the character, their history, and their relationships, and a tendency to play lawful and/or good characters associated with groups of factions that helped shape the structure of the game environment.
I treasure most of my time spent on CoA and at the same time deeply regret that I eventually reached the point where I felt I was wasting my time (more so than by playing computer games) and chose to stop playing.
Whatever the case, I don't know that this post changes anything or anybody's opinion, but maybe it does. I do hope that CoA can continue and overcome whatever issues it has, but it isn't DMs or Players that will fix whatever ails it, it is DMs and Players in an appropriate balance. That is the art of it all.
Aldrien
-
I'm definitely in favor of a more sandbox approach and agree that it is something that should have been done a long time ago. The server needs more ways in order to have a dynamic world without a DM's presence 24/7. I think something like Ravenloft's dynamic creature population system which allows creatures to move and if unchecked can actually lead into aggressive expansion such as rats overflowing from the sewers or Orcs controlling the roads etc. Stuff like this makes it so the world feels alive without necessarily a DM on and instead of going on a repeatable quest of killing orcs where there is no consequence whether you suceed or fail (aside from you dying) this actually gives players the feeling they are having an impact on the world. Suppose a band of orcs which is created by the system starts moving out and expanding eventually attacking nearby settlements and becoming something of a small army. Now a player decides to organize a group of players to go out and destroy this army. BAM! He or she becomes a hero and all without a single DM online. Now as for scripting a system like this there is already something out there on NWNVault which would make something like this feasibe. I think any NWN server which is still alive is going to have to transition to a more sand box like environment which doesn't necessarcily need DMs present in the way they have in the past, you can see this in the MMORPG industry as with people getting tired of WoWs or themeparks where new content is simply the answer. Guild Wars 2 has been such a hit because it has tried to offer an illusion of a "living world" with consequences instead of killing 10 orcs in a zone and the next group goes out to do the same thing. More and more sandbox titles are being announced which indicates a general shift in what the RPG community wants as a whole. I see a similar dynamic being played out on NWN and in CoA in particular. Create more opportunities for the world to thrive that don't rely on DM quests or plots and rather put things in the hands of players and stuff that can let them make an impact on the world on their own. This is what will be needed to breathe life into CoA and any other PW that hopes to survive within this next decade.
-
Who are you to say who was or wasn't the last good choice for a DM B-Rock. That's rather insulting to newer dms.
I dunno who you are, or who would find what I said insulting. I'm sure they know what I said to be true too.
Either way…onto the sandbox thing you guys are throwing around...terrible idea. Why? Because thats the same faux reality that was version 4. Right around the beginning of it v4 was touted as "sandbox"...the server needs less freedom with the small playerbase, or else everyone will be doing they own thing by themselves, all 8 of them. Again sandbox is a terrible idea...its akin to a MMO going free to play. Go sandbox if you want the server dead more faster. The server is losing focus...focus guys!!! Sandbox is not focus. The new story/narrative has to be extremely strong to force people to give a damn about it.
Now the thing DonD explains above isn't sandbox, its just good scripting. And having tried out other servers, its pretty important to have that.
-
@Broken:
Game died when the servers emphasis was less about having fun and more about being a "mover and shaker". That whole Adventure & Intrigue shtick was the worst and pressured players who wanted their characters to progress into this idea that one had to have all the time in the world to basically do the stuff a DM in traditional DnD is meant to do. It became work for a lot of people and created an elitist attitude among the player-base that remains to this day.
The DM team has never really had a sense of congruence in its own plot lines or story arcs, which only adds to the frustrations of players who eventually became by-products of A&I, where suddenly having fun and "Simming" became a taboo and anyone who didn't push a plot or antagonize powerful PCs/NPCs were pretty much classified as bad players.
I haven't been playing because, over the years, a lot of the players with whom I enjoyed playing left. Whenever I saw their "leaving" posts, I would PM them goodbye, and this reason would almost always come up in the conversation we had before I never heard from them again. I got tired of making and losing friends over and over again because they left after they started to feel marginalized. In a lot of the conversations I had, though, it wasn't the DMs doing the marginalizing. It was other players, but I guess that Adventure and Intrigue post set the tone that created the environment where people felt antagonized and left. I always get on here and whine about Adventure and Intrigue (and not even the concept of Adventure and Intrigue as much as the unfortunate side effects of Adventure and Intrigue, as Broken Gunblade described them) when threads like this come up, though, and the bottom line is, I don't think players who have left for this reason are missed by anyone except other players who have left for the same reason. So I just lurk and wait to see which direction things go from here.
-
-
-
The server is losing focus…focus guys!!! Sandbox is not focus. The new story/narrative has to be extremely strong to force people to give a damn about it.
This would go a long way to helping, certainly!
There certainly needs to be more DM activity too, 1 DM in game isn't enough!
The server / setting needs freshening up too, it's hardly changed in 10 years. I hate to sound like a negative nancy but the changes to the slums are pretty dreadful. No care has been taken at all, there are street-signs all over the place, there is no feeling or atmosphere, the pit area still has a marker on it - I honestly think it's one of the worst things to have happened to the server in a while, the old slums was cool and gritty. The new one is just dull.
Players need to be more interesting too, as Olouth said in an earlier post the vibe seems to be at the moment "solve DM plots" rather than going and being interesting by yourself. Players aren't telling stories any more, they are essentially just running DM led scripted quests.
CoA isn't losing players due to negativity, it's losing players because there are very obvious shortcomings
-
Sandbox does not rule out lack of a central story or narriative. It also does not mean that there is no focus. What it means is more control to players, and player factions in driving and effecting the server. Thats how I see it at least.
-
Any sandbox elements would be an addition not a replacement. Storyline is vastly higher priority to me, though. And well, unless Bacon goes mental, I don't see me managing to script lots of sandbox stuff in the very very near future, whereas I can always run events and plotlines.
-
Basic Sandbox elements shouldnt be too hard to put in i'd say.
Simple things like that treasure chest Novo used to be able to load with goodies at base and then teleport somewhere with a tool.
Or buyable and placable barricades so people can run wargames in non quest areas. Buyable flags for capture the flag games too.
-
Some people have touched on some of this but:
Make it fun. Bring back a storyline that puts 98% of the server on the same side and make it an obvious plot that anyone can get involved in with little work. There's nothing wrong with drow attacking the city or people questing getting jumped by whatever the current bad thing is. Keeping people on their toes and in constant danger is exciting even if it is cliche.
A compelling storyline would be great. An obvious one would be better. A plot that four people know about isn't sustainable with our current player/DM levels. I played 5 days over the past week and half and looking around the city, it looks like the city is completely fine. There are some undead to the east but no one seems very bent out of shape over it. The bounty system people are having a little fun with, but as far as I know I'm walking around heavily armed for no apparent reason.
We simply don't have the numbers for great secret intrigues and complex politics anymore. When NWN 2 came out the ToM server tried to launch as the CoA for the platform. It became immediately and painfully clear- it doesn't work at all if your average hourly player count is 6. If there are only two faction people are intriguing against each other, that's fine for them but it does nothing for the rest of the server. Reduce the city factions to ONE. Give them old school guard powers and responsibilities but leave them free to leave the city. If you want some faction characters to be by the book good guys, some of them to hate mages, and some of them to be evil or corrupt then make that a player-character decision and put them in the same faction. Put the focus back on character vs character and give them a backdrop to work together on and freedom to PVP kill each other when things go bad. Giving some players real power over others creates conflict ;) Other factions- leave it to the players to create and give them help.
I little polish on some of the new additions will come in time I know. You guys are working hard on things with limited time and no pay so I won't go too much into this but: unless there is a plot device, a proper dungeon or quest or some secret, or planned future need in the storyline for an area- get rid of it.
Otherwise- the server looks good. There's some new buildings and areas that are supercool and would be great to start a player faction in. New kits and scripts and items and tools all look pretty nice.
-
Any sandbox elements would be an addition not a replacement. Storyline is vastly higher priority to me, though. And well, unless Bacon goes mental, I don't see me managing to script lots of sandbox stuff in the very very near future, whereas I can always run events and plotlines.
I love you Bable.
And a +2 to what Fel has said above. Which is more or less what should be done. I myself, have never been a fan of guard factions. But the addition of the pit, and my idea of the player customisable faction bases, should allow less annoying e-peen-stroking-while-2-hours-behind-a-cell of said factions. But while those are just petpeeves and nice sprinkles on a cupcake. I wanna really focus on new additions to the server that matter with the overarching plot.
-
BG's post sums it up pretty well. CoA was, at least to me, a very inclusive roleplaying environment. Granted back then we had a very large playerbase so any shades of elitism were sort of muffled, but it was still fairly easy to get into the midst of things. I like to think there isn't a whole lot of elitism on the server anymore, so no need to address that can of worms.
That said, many server policies are outdated and structured for a server with a population upwards of hundreds. For instance, the application system was implemented (this is my guess, mind you, so I could be wrong) so half-dragons wouldn't run amok and so that DMs could keep track of who has what perks given the sprawling playerbase. However, now that we have a smaller playerbase it just makes an already slow-paced game (which it won't be, once the changes go in, for DMs - excluding myself because I'm a lazy bastard, and I apologize profusely for this - are very hard at work) even more tedious. As it is now, it simply encourages pandering to DMs in the hopes of getting something passed. The best advice I ever heard for the application system was to make something the DMs would like, and then ignore it once you're set up and in-game. I would consider making less exotic subraces such as aasimar, genasi, and tieflings non-app., or at the very least loosen the restrictions a bit ("why do you want this subrace is an idiotic question, frankly"; the only reason someone ever wants something in a roleplaying environment is because they think it'd be cool; if the application wouldn't be hurt by the subrace, it's fine).
If you think about it, the best MMOs and MOBAs and what not tend to have high ease-of-access features but an equally high skill ceiling. This is something that CoA lacks (skill ceiling is only marginally important, if at all; it's a roleplaying server, not an action server, at least in theory). Streamlining a new player's introduction to the server is necessary. While the Adventurer's Guildhall does have a number of jobs posted on the bulletin boards, they're not very encompassing. I'm guessing that it wouldn't be too difficult to change the NPC's dialogue, starting with the Caravan Master saying "why don't you head on over to the Adventurer's Guildhall, directly to your right?" Once there Celas can point out a wide variety of quests and their rough locations.
I'd also consider raising the starting level to 2. Yes, it wouldn't solve and "real" problems and just turn levels 2 - 4 into the new levels 1 - 3, but at least they'd get to 4 quicker, rather than 3. Plus, in my experience, 4 is when PCs start to feel less useless (or capable of surviving something). Combined with a streamlined early leveling phase, however, it should be a breeze to get to 4. Accordingly, the respawn penalty may need to be looked into. It's exorbitantly expensive at the moment, and in some ways actively discourages people from taking risks or heading out to adventure. Considering how much effort was placed in the idea of PCs going out to explore on their own, it seems counterproductive. Certainly, death should be a very real fear, but that is easily enforced by a DM simply saying "this event is perma-death." Besides, it's a damn annoying way to go, rage-quitting after getting killed by a dire spider on a quest or being jumped by ankhegs exploring.
Finally, one thing that bears mentioning: DMs are not here to server players; likewise, players are not here to please DMs. DMs, just like the players, are here to roleplay. The only difference is that where DMs provide inspiration for stories or push those of players along, it is ultimately left to the players to decide what to do with them. In other words, DMs are catalysts. I find myself far more motivated to log on and run things for PCs when there are already PCs trying to do something. In fact, my preferred modus operandi is for PCs to approach me and pitch an idea; if it's not too far-fetched (or even if it is, in some cases) then I'll nudge them in the right direction (X, Y, or Z things that may make it easier on them), and once they feel like they're ready for it I run the actual event. Case in point, if you want an awesome weapon, then go get all the materials necessary for its creation (hopefully by adventuring or clever bartering with other PCs), find a smith to forge it (or do it yourself, if that's what you've been working towards), and perhaps I'll run a dungeon crawler through the Halls of Thrivaldi in the hopes of impressing a number of dwarven NPCs to gain dwarven enchantments.
Also I don't really like DM factions. I prefer NPCs to exist as people; in other words, with an emphasis on the "PC." Just like everyone else, they have their own agendas and motivations that, if chosen to, PCs can help or hinder. That said, there's room for a couple just to provide a foundation of sorts for the server.
Finally, one thing I'd like to address is the whole "Adventure & Intrigue" thing. This is purely my opinion, but it's terrible. It never had a place in CoA, not even when our server numbers were booming. There is absolutely no reason to tell people flat out that "your style of play isn't welcome on the server." If people want to portray PCs who simply eke out a living in Arabel, then that's fine. Not everyone has to be Lex Luthor in a suit of full plate. I was supposed to say this a lot earlier but I kinda got off on a tangent (hence the first sentences talking about CoA's inclusive nature), so to summarize: people should be allowed to play what they want. Again, I'm not saying this means everyone should get to play a vampiric half-dragon lich tiefling fighter/wizard/pale master, but like I said before, inasmuch as DMs are here to have fun, so are PCs, and while there will always be PCs that DMs will enjoy, not every PC fits into a DM's storyline.
I'll have more thoughts later, and yes, I will start DMing again. It was a rather hectic week for me in terms of work.
-
Easier apping and less costly respawns would go a long way to helping things imo. So much rage losing thousands of xp to those bounty hunts, I quit doing them.
-
The A&I post just gave me a tonne of idea on how to do cool fun stuff.
I think people might have taken it too litteraly?
I never took it to mean anyones style of play wasn't welcome, I mean, I think it even says several times 'If you want to do that, thats fine, go ahead' and simply stated that many of the DMs would be less likely to turn up and create fireworks or roleplay a farmhand.
I think thats just honest, I know I prefer to play an insane gnome worshipping an albino mole that tunnels through the abyss than billy the stable boy joining a tea party.
I still roleplay every relevant character of course, but the A&I thing just got taken too litterally, and not as it was intended, which was as a helpful guide, in response to many players at the time complaning they didnt understand why things werent going their way.
-
I dunno.. People keep saying that the server is boring because we lack people who'd log in and do cool stuff. So they won't log in and do cool stuff. Vicious circle?
Of course it gets boring if people only log in for DM events.
And demands like "I'll only start playing again if you change this and that" are simply unreasonable.DMs can only help players by building the infrastructure for characters to exist in and do cool stuff. DM factions are one way to do that. They are means to an end and we've seen in the past they can work pretty well. I wish someone could explain why they think it isn't so.
People who think the game would be more fun for everyone if death had negligent penalties or if everyone had an exotic subrace don't convince me either.
-
…
DMs can only help players by building the infrastructure for characters to exist in and do cool stuff. DM factions are one way to do that. They are means to an end and we've seen in the past they can work pretty well. I wish someone could explain why they think it isn't so.
.Not enough people to support the NUMBER of DM factions. More factions than characters during the playtimes I've peeked into.
Fel mentioned cutting it down to one faction, and having characters be cooperative against the common enemy.
I think that would definitely improve things, although there is still the issue of not just low PC count but low DM count, so many would not be able to be involved due to timezone issues.I'd suggest cutting it down to TWO factions. an Arabel-supportive faction and a faction which is supportive of the "enemy". Might be a "official" faction if the enemy is something like Zhents/Thay/Sembia/etc with a town-base somewhere…. or.. might be a secret faction if the enemy is something like cults, criminals, etc. Maybe one Arabel faction, and a couple SMALL anti-arable factions that semi-cooperate. (For example, Zhents agents and Forsaken Legion grudgingly work together against Arabel)
In any case, cutting the number of factions down, and having the "factions" be in direct support on either side of some largish plot would allow for DMs to login, support either side quite easily (only TWO main plots to keep track of) , allow for PCs to try and recruit, allow for double/triple agents etc. Cutting the DM faction count way down, along with some means for player factions to do stuff (whatever that stuff that has been alluded to is) may well assist.
A concern I have with lowering DM faction count, is that fractionalizing the base into small player factions may well make things worse.
Need to have some way to ensure player faction perks don't just devolve into promoting of small-team quest groups. -
The idea I had a while back for one Meta Faction, which would allow a WIDE range of concepts, alignments ideas and would create intrigue for shizzles would solve many of the issues being addressed.
-
i agree with some of what is said here, i usualy whent into anaurauch to mine on my own.. well i am a loner by nature, and is reflected into the game, although in the recent weeks, i have made sending to includ people to come mining with me, wich in turn, turned out good, three time i had people comming with me, and on those three occasion, we had fun mining our way througth the desert, of course nothing major happened, but just normal rping, instead of waiting for something to happen via a sending or else, we had fun exploring the desert, i am also high level, so i make sure that the people that come with me, will stay alive when a mithril or gold guardian come out from a vein just mined, or when a forest bligth is spawned, i think it is important that everyone survive in such exploration, as if they were constantly dying following me, i would quickly feel the desinterest of others in my sending, i also did try and be more… hmmmm sympatic/likeable to those i would normally not be, exemple the hardcastle staff, ususaly i would just piss them off with much pleasure (and for just cause on my mind) but doing so, put me kinda of in corner of a room, alone with a donkey hat on my head, because now the lack of players here, force me to do one of three things.
One: play a newly created character that would be welcome by hardcastle staff, as they are clearly the main group of the server, and much pass throught them, but i dont like the idea of playing a character just to be accept by others, and feel includ in the game, i want to play a character I WILL LIKE, not what others wish me to play or what dm may like to see from me, no offense to anyone by saying this.
Two: break my views and opinion and rp style with my main character to fit a bit more with those i would not usualy fit with ( wich i am doing now with Gondar Vale ).
Three: leave for better pasture, but the next pasture i know about, is somehow gray and brown, so my option are limited, i try to stay here, and bring something to the server, in hope that in time, more players will come back or join us, and well i am very resiliant... like a bad rash that doesnt go away :P