Re: DIS: reality check

[Ned Strange]

are we the world's longest running internet game?

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 7:57 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> I was wondering a couple months back if a 25-year anniversary was an
> occasion for posting on various forums (e.g. a "hey check out a nomic
> that's been going for 25 years).
>
> On Wed, 23 May 2018, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> > Aside from poaching other nomics for players lol, what is a good approach
> > for recruiting? Posting in reddits/forums I guess?
> >
> > We could make a common copypasta for advertisement and go around with
> that.
> >
> > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:35 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 24 May 2018, Ned Strange wrote:
> > > > Can we recruit new players lol? I miss o for one. And the japanese
> > > > character guy. 6-7 is far less than we once had.
> > >
> > > Yah it kind of got lost in the last exchange but that was a point...
> > > PSS too...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: reality check

[Kerim Aydin]

I was wondering a couple months back if a 25-year anniversary was an
occasion for posting on various forums (e.g. a "hey check out a nomic
that's been going for 25 years).

On Wed, 23 May 2018, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> Aside from poaching other nomics for players lol, what is a good approach
> for recruiting? Posting in reddits/forums I guess?
> 
> We could make a common copypasta for advertisement and go around with that.
> 
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:35 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 24 May 2018, Ned Strange wrote:
> > > Can we recruit new players lol? I miss o for one. And the japanese
> > > character guy. 6-7 is far less than we once had.
> >
> > Yah it kind of got lost in the last exchange but that was a point...
> > PSS too...
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: DIS: reality check

[Cuddle Beam]

Aside from poaching other nomics for players lol, what is a good approach
for recruiting? Posting in reddits/forums I guess?

We could make a common copypasta for advertisement and go around with that.

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:35 PM, Kerim Aydin 
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 24 May 2018, Ned Strange wrote:
> > Can we recruit new players lol? I miss o for one. And the japanese
> > character guy. 6-7 is far less than we once had.
>
> Yah it kind of got lost in the last exchange but that was a point...
> PSS too...
>
>
>
>

Re: DIS: reality check

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 24 May 2018, Ned Strange wrote:
> Can we recruit new players lol? I miss o for one. And the japanese
> character guy. 6-7 is far less than we once had.

Yah it kind of got lost in the last exchange but that was a point...
PSS too...

Re: DIS: reality check

[Ned Strange]

Can we recruit new players lol? I miss o for one. And the japanese
character guy. 6-7 is far less than we once had.

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 7:17 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 23 May 2018, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> > What could maybe be done is have Offices be "self-service" in a way. If
> you
> > want to do something related to it, you look for the last mail and
> continue
> > the chain.
> >
> > It would be a different Office paradigm though. But maybe it works. With
> > the current system, Offices don't scale well with low activity (but scale
> > really well into massive activity).
>
> How does it work with tracking microtransactions in a dozen currencies
> along with land production of same currencies?  In particular if we allow
> people to transfer "all their currencies" or similar not-immediately-
> determinate conditionals?)  Or if transfer success/failure depends on
> other game circumstances (e.g. you try to pay for pending a proposal but
> it's already pended).
>
> Self-service websites might work for basic transactions, but this drops
> flexibility (like allowing act-on-behalfs, contracts, etc.), and even if
> such a site captures 90% of the transactions, someone would still have to
> do the remaining 10% by hand and then the time savings are lost.
>
> The underlying issue is that part of "Flavor of Agora" to preserve is
> figuring out how you can use (or abuse) language to do all these
> complicated things within the constraints of announcements. And since we
> like to do that kind of thing, having "the next person in line" have to
> figure out whether your transaction succeeded before doing theirs is a
> recipe for uncertainty. (with an Officer, you get a consistent viewpoint
> and a single source of CFJ calling when the Officer can't sort it out).
>
> I'm not meaning to be negative here at all just thinking through the
> possibilities.  I'd *love* to do Land through a web interface with
> instant feedback.
>
>
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: reality check

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 23 May 2018, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> What could maybe be done is have Offices be "self-service" in a way. If you
> want to do something related to it, you look for the last mail and continue
> the chain.
> 
> It would be a different Office paradigm though. But maybe it works. With
> the current system, Offices don't scale well with low activity (but scale
> really well into massive activity).

How does it work with tracking microtransactions in a dozen currencies 
along with land production of same currencies?  In particular if we allow
people to transfer "all their currencies" or similar not-immediately-
determinate conditionals?)  Or if transfer success/failure depends on
other game circumstances (e.g. you try to pay for pending a proposal but
it's already pended).

Self-service websites might work for basic transactions, but this drops 
flexibility (like allowing act-on-behalfs, contracts, etc.), and even if
such a site captures 90% of the transactions, someone would still have to 
do the remaining 10% by hand and then the time savings are lost.   

The underlying issue is that part of "Flavor of Agora" to preserve is 
figuring out how you can use (or abuse) language to do all these 
complicated things within the constraints of announcements. And since we
like to do that kind of thing, having "the next person in line" have to
figure out whether your transaction succeeded before doing theirs is a
recipe for uncertainty. (with an Officer, you get a consistent viewpoint
and a single source of CFJ calling when the Officer can't sort it out).

I'm not meaning to be negative here at all just thinking through the
possibilities.  I'd *love* to do Land through a web interface with
instant feedback.

Re: DIS: reality check

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 23 May 2018, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> > So the only one to attribute balance/needing a reset as a reason for not 
> > playing
> was CuddleBeam?
> 
> Also, to clarify, I much prefer a reset to a nerf. I don't like nerfs. From
> my point of view, you earned the power you have. Game balance is totally
> not a problem for me - because I believe that it's been balanced all along.
> It's just that I haven't been able to benefit from the fruits of early
> participation and I feel bad for missing out on that, so the solution is to
> wait for a new round before going for it again.
> 
> Nerfs to try to incentivize activity annoys me lol. It's like if the
> players who want it (those who are suffering from what they want nerfed)
> are holding activity hostage and won't give any until the rest comply to
> their demands. It doesn't feel right and I'd feel guilty for participating
> in it.

That's a more BlogNomic or FRC mentality where "full resets" are an official
and regular part of play that end in well-specified rounds.  We've never had
that setup.  Almost all win conditions outside of Contests don't reset the
state for everyone else (Ribbons are the perfect example).  We've been going 
for more of an "economy" feel which means if a sector of the economy gets
out of control, you tax/regulate ("nerf") it going forward while not
stealing everything from those who got ahead.

I mean we do scrap entire systems for new ones but it's because we're 
collectively tired of the system, not because the "round is over".  When we 
tried a bit of that mechanic (via "Eras") no one ever agreed to reset.

Re: DIS: reality check

[Cuddle Beam]

> So the only one to attribute balance/needing a reset as a reason for not 
> playing
was CuddleBeam?

Also, to clarify, I much prefer a reset to a nerf. I don't like nerfs. From
my point of view, you earned the power you have. Game balance is totally
not a problem for me - because I believe that it's been balanced all along.
It's just that I haven't been able to benefit from the fruits of early
participation and I feel bad for missing out on that, so the solution is to
wait for a new round before going for it again.

Nerfs to try to incentivize activity annoys me lol. It's like if the
players who want it (those who are suffering from what they want nerfed)
are holding activity hostage and won't give any until the rest comply to
their demands. It doesn't feel right and I'd feel guilty for participating
in it.

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 5:38 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:

> What could maybe be done is have Offices be "self-service" in a way. If
> you want to do something related to it, you look for the last mail and
> continue the chain.
>
> It would be a different Office paradigm though. But maybe it works. With
> the current system, Offices don't scale well with low activity (but scale
> really well into massive activity).
>
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 22 May 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> > VJ. Rada and PSS voted FOR, Trigon, Aris, ATMunn, G. (counted twice),
>> > and o voted AGAINST, and Murphy voted PRESENT.
>>
>> ok, looking at this voting list, these are all the folks that have kept
>> playing recently, and those frustrated with the current gameplay have
>> Said
>> Something instead of vanishing (and we're trying to fix that stuff).
>>
>> On our players list, the missing are Galean (who has disappeared a couple
>> times before), Ouri (who was basically a drive-by) and Kenyon.  I find it
>> odd that Kenyon would implement Rulekeeping and then vanish because of
>> gameplay frustration without saying anything (more likely just RL though
>> dunno of course).
>>
>> So the only one to attribute balance/needing a reset as a reason for not
>> playing was CuddleBeam? (who mentioned that the Agoran gameplay other
>> than long essays/CFJs is not eir style in general, anyway).
>>
>> Not that we don't need to fix imbalances but it doesn't seem to be the
>> major barrier to participation.  At this size (6 or 7) keeping the
>> offices going is a real struggle (and I was hoping for a bit of a break
>> in June honestly tho I guess if it's slow that can just happen...)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: DIS: reality check

[Cuddle Beam]

What could maybe be done is have Offices be "self-service" in a way. If you
want to do something related to it, you look for the last mail and continue
the chain.

It would be a different Office paradigm though. But maybe it works. With
the current system, Offices don't scale well with low activity (but scale
really well into massive activity).

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 22 May 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > VJ. Rada and PSS voted FOR, Trigon, Aris, ATMunn, G. (counted twice),
> > and o voted AGAINST, and Murphy voted PRESENT.
>
> ok, looking at this voting list, these are all the folks that have kept
> playing recently, and those frustrated with the current gameplay have Said
> Something instead of vanishing (and we're trying to fix that stuff).
>
> On our players list, the missing are Galean (who has disappeared a couple
> times before), Ouri (who was basically a drive-by) and Kenyon.  I find it
> odd that Kenyon would implement Rulekeeping and then vanish because of
> gameplay frustration without saying anything (more likely just RL though
> dunno of course).
>
> So the only one to attribute balance/needing a reset as a reason for not
> playing was CuddleBeam? (who mentioned that the Agoran gameplay other
> than long essays/CFJs is not eir style in general, anyway).
>
> Not that we don't need to fix imbalances but it doesn't seem to be the
> major barrier to participation.  At this size (6 or 7) keeping the
> offices going is a real struggle (and I was hoping for a bit of a break
> in June honestly tho I guess if it's slow that can just happen...)
>
>
>
>

DIS: reality check

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 22 May 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: 
> VJ. Rada and PSS voted FOR, Trigon, Aris, ATMunn, G. (counted twice), 
> and o voted AGAINST, and Murphy voted PRESENT.  

ok, looking at this voting list, these are all the folks that have kept
playing recently, and those frustrated with the current gameplay have Said 
Something instead of vanishing (and we're trying to fix that stuff).  

On our players list, the missing are Galean (who has disappeared a couple 
times before), Ouri (who was basically a drive-by) and Kenyon.  I find it
odd that Kenyon would implement Rulekeeping and then vanish because of 
gameplay frustration without saying anything (more likely just RL though 
dunno of course).

So the only one to attribute balance/needing a reset as a reason for not 
playing was CuddleBeam? (who mentioned that the Agoran gameplay other
than long essays/CFJs is not eir style in general, anyway).

Not that we don't need to fix imbalances but it doesn't seem to be the 
major barrier to participation.  At this size (6 or 7) keeping the
offices going is a real struggle (and I was hoping for a bit of a break
in June honestly tho I guess if it's slow that can just happen...)