GOP Community Chat Lounge GCCL
Quick find code: 90-91-623-65151570
13-Nov-2013 04:43:24 - Last edited on 14-Nov-2013 23:17:25 by Yusou Bhoroi
Yes, I agree that population in the FC is a key thing for making it obvious that there are others playing GOP; but that can be achieved with a/few rank/s(invisible included), who'd/who're there to answer questions and help out, along with the newcommers who stay.
It's the latter that we lost, due to the unfriendly atmosphere, caused by bad language (in general), and unkindness towards newcommers; not everyone was doing that, some were just in there and being indifferent (though that was usually including being rude, just in conversation with eachother). Given that it is the Help chat.. indifference isn't really on.. and if they don't wish to be helping out, then why were they in there D:?
I know it was never meant to conflict with Gioppi, for experienced players, and they were deliberately sepperate, so that the attitudes stayed sepperate; if attitudes cahnged, then fine, but they haven't (and were actually pushing the newcommers out of the chat [they've nearly all stopped staying in the FC, whenever they're online]), which is just wrong.
Populationis better provided by those the FC is aimed at, rather than those it's not; and as they seem to be mutually exclusive, at the moment, then it's obvious which our 1st priority should be.
It would be great if they all wished to help, and were, but otherwise, it's better provided by having more people who are at the same stages (newer players), who can then learn together, and have visible steps on their progression ladders, if they wished for them, and not feel oppressed by too many 'pros', even if they were all helpfull.
Some peoples' version of 'helping' is grinding the newcommers nose in, about how new they are; you can point out hte complexities of Gop, and the fun to be had learning it, without doing that; there certainly doesn't need to be the egotripping that's done by a few..
14-Nov-2013 03:55:47 - Last edited on 14-Nov-2013 23:53:40 by Yusou Bhoroi
I have been on a bit, but I have pm off... we've started having problems with certain people turning up on the world I'm on, repetetively, and causing disturbance.. (you'll probably know who I mean, as they've had their pm on..), so I've not been in the chat much, either; not that I've been on much, anyway.
It's good to hear that they were joining in, though I worry about what happened Not sure some people would have remained as polite as you or I; it's really sad that Tommi couldn't have been there, as he's been the one doing the poking for this..
I don't think there will be a return visit, any time soon, as he did similar things for Soul Wars, on prompting, which was a one off (so far).
Any more details ? and how are you?
I did see that people were in 66 for 4-5 hours O-o (I was in the lobby for quite some time, while having food and working). Mostly Emub, in that he was there the longest, I think.
I'm not sure what the problem is, atm, but something odd is going on that I'm not privy to, as a lot of the Vt' and the Sv' ranks are being very silent, nowhere near as talkative as normal, might just be that a lot are planning to do the Knurj' this year.. but I would have thought they'd say O-o Maybe it's just the problems with afformentioned annoying people.
I'll be working from home on Friday and Sat, so should have some time free to be on more, I don't think Tommi will be back by then.
I did mean to say something, but I've completely forgotten O-o take care!
Puu came O-o Never met him, but some of the ones who came to Gop with us did.
Staying up to finish this work off, then will probably have most of tomorrow night free!
21-Nov-2013 01:36:19 - Last edited on 23-Nov-2013 05:36:31 by Yusou Bhoroi
He'll probably have too much to do, to get started on the Minigame Completionists Group thingie, for Months.. so I wonder if I could take some of it off his hands, so that it can get started...
Take care Timo, and I should be back on um... Saturday morning, Idk when, it might even be the tail end of Friday night.. depending on when I go to sleep, and if I've done unpacking/sorting beforehand (in Japan for 3 days, though will only see what I can from a car window, on the way to studio from Airport, and then the same back, the studio won't even have windows... not sure if wherever I will be dossing-down in breaks will.. though knowing how it usually goes, it might end up with forgoing sleep.. so, all in all, I'm not sure I'll actually see anything more than the last two times >****; even had blacked out windows for the 2nd one, as it was one of their silly cars for transporting people who like privicy... so boring those people It will be interesting work though, and possibility of some extra things Idk about, if needed for something other than the direct collaboration, by the studio..) anyways, I should get some sleep.. take care and I hope to see you (both) at the weekend !
If this slot is free (router and Comp ID, not sure how many are linked to router, I've only used 2, I think), then others should have no excuse for not helping out >:}.
Ha, well you'd better make sure every time they do a GWD event, to delete every mention that you need to bring food or armour or weapons.. because the things about Gop mechanics are just that: Mechanics...
They are hard fact about what happens when you do 'x', and are unchangable, irrefutable and just... Gop.. therefore, saying how to get orb from A to B, using a method which works with the mechanics, rather than one which doesn't and ends up with the orb being in an unreachable place, is just basic help; they have no right to delete that, if they allow gear guidance for GWD events (which they do).
You should even be allowed to put the whole lot of Gop mechanics and coording, soloing (todploord, even) on there.. because they allow the minutiae of tactics to be posted about other events, so they are hypocritical and persecuting you (you can quote this, and have my citation as the last Armadyl event). It is not on, and they shouldn't be doing it; if the rules apply to you, with that interpretation, then they should be applied to others, in the same way.
What they are doing to you, is essentially a tier 1 action, in comparison to them allowing others to go to tier 4 out of 5, without even a comment (other than possitive encouragement).
Sources: back catalogue of events, especially the GWD ones, but some others,
too.. look at the talk pages, revisions and edits, and that's my case in one.
Edit: maybe interfaces is a bit far, though saying big helps
I hardly helped Femalenight at all D: .. I only did about 3 games with her (Vio was there, as he'd brought her; I think they'd met training somewhere on P2P, so it was nice that he brought her to us ) and I'd not slept for 76 hours, so was worse than useless, lol, I think we didn't get anything above 40 at all, in all 3, but I made sure there were people to carry on helping after I left, and for the other two who were there at the time.
08-Dec-2013 16:35:38 - Last edited on 08-Dec-2013 17:05:58 by Yusou Bhoroi
and does that comment mean that Tommi will be back in 2 days? or was there something else implied? (yes, I'm asking here to make you post here >:} )
Edit: Inb4 some wierd alt I didn't know you had posts.
Edit2: Never mind, I just checked the list and I knew of all of them; but you have no reason not to post now!
13-Dec-2013 21:30:13 - Last edited on 13-Dec-2013 21:36:53 by Yusou Bhoroi
I hope all goes well!
Sorry to have missed you. :/
Mitz says O-o wag wag wag wag wag wag whistle wag wag lick lick wag wag wag
Good to know little Mej will have people arround, too; was a bit worrying, though I know that's more normal there..
You had Christmas last Year, or was your House's the one previous?
Hope to see you as soon as!
Adamantite ore x 1 :14
Mith ore x3 :42
Mith Med x 1 :3
Rune sq x1 :1
Diamond x1 :1
uncut emerald x1 :2
uncut ruby x1 :2
uncut sapphire x1 :6
Are the rules of the RSOF exclusively that of the English law?
Just wondering because I was going to make a thread in off-topic on the subject of the Colorado decision to legalise *a certain leafy plant*. But decided not to because I was sure it would get an insta-lock; despite meaning it to be a sensible debate on the pros and cons, rather than a cheerleading thread or anything like that.
Illegal drugs cannot be talked about here and that is a good thing imo, but what about a substance that is both legal and illegal (depending on jurisdiction)?
For example, alcohol is illegal in Muslim countries, but I'm sure a thread on booze would never be removed, unless it was enthusing about excessive unhealthy consumption rates.
Brassica Prime is illegal in Colorado O-o?
On another note: Anyone willing to form a regular Free-Group Quadploord team?
The Random Number Generator Gods are fickle and bow not to mortal man.
This person has obviously never played Gop.
(another quote for your collection, Tommi).
Original message details are unavailable.
It's a lie I'm really Brassica Prime masquerading as a human. Shhh don't tell anyone. Otherwise they'll be out for my leaves.
Original message details are unavailable.
Just wondering because I was going to make a thread in off-topic on the subject of the Colorado decision to legalise *a certain leafy plant*. But decided not to
They fit well together O-o
Original message details are unavailable.
=== WHAT IS A MODERATOR? ===
There are mainly two types of moderators:
21-Jan-2014 12:23:30 - Last edited on 24-Jan-2014 08:00:46 by Yusou Bhoroi
Will put our Gop things into perspective! ^ ^
I hope Nalx is ok.. he's a bit old for wonderings at that temperature.
Shame you can't post it.. can you nudge about permission?
Would be fun, as it's so complicated, and the mapping would be nice to build on.
Chat threads are great ways to keep the "spam" all in one place. People can chat and get to know each other and if someone just wants to be random they can post there instead of making another spam thread or post in a legitimate thread.
..... that 246 was just epic.... I know you average more than the highest I've scored.. but 246, lol I doubt my ploord mti will ever be that high. WB though, and I'm glad you had chance for a few games.
Please can you come and give a few lessons.. really need them atm, I can't play that well as a team, yet.
15-Feb-2014 15:13:16 - Last edited on 15-Feb-2014 22:22:03 by Yusou Bhoroi
I'm selling 983k cups of tea worth 211m ge price but hoping to get more can some one please message me or reply back as soon as possible thanks
Still open, Timo!
Okai, soh, I haev 2 du sphinx 4 GOP Tea cζp:
('cape' is used to denote unnammed entity, but obv it's not an actual cape, it's the forum-thing).
Well, as it's something that's a gradual staging, and we don't wish to put people off trying to attain it, I think the targets, even the 'hard' ones, shouldn't be too hard.. as it's probably better to get more people interested, and trying to go for it (the whole thing), with the impression that it's attainable, rather than only a few.
The Advanced cape/master cape, and trimmed, will, of course, be much harder, though I don't think we could justify it being something which would challenge the top players.. after all, it would take most people many Years to reach even half that standard, even if they played all their available time, and had a computer/connection to do so. It's unlikely (and unfair) to expect a wide range of people to do so.
We could of course have a further thing, which is non-official to the system, which would be for such people who will dedicate themselves beyond the ordinary.
Yet to decide whether it will be done as a set path (akin to levels 1-10 for 1st cape, 10-20 for 2nd, and so on), or whether it will just be a list of things required for each, or even that you need to have a set number out of the list completed.
I will now, in the following posts, outline my own ideas for what each 'cape'/level may possibly entail, and will altar them with feedback, so we can get a rough idea, before going for something concrete.
07-May-2014 01:48:08 - Last edited on 07-May-2014 01:54:48 by Yusou Bhoroi
Should know the general idea of gameplay (not much more than the Wizards tell you, really).
Should know what the Centre Positions are, and a little about why they are usefull.
Should have participated in at least 5 games of Gop; with at least one duo.
Be familiar with a good duo setup, and be able to explain why it works (this will only need to be on a basic level, no in-depth analysis needed, and certainly nothing advanced, just the common-sense side of it).
Have participated in at least one solo.
Know what the differences (advantages/disadvantages) are between Green and Yellow.
07-May-2014 02:34:31 - Last edited on 07-May-2014 03:19:36 by Yusou Bhoroi
Must demonstrate that they are familiar with basic, proximal o-a-o techniques.
Must know corner angles, from W of orb.
Must have shown competence in duoing, having achieved 40 on both colours, with one of the set witnisses.
07-May-2014 02:35:14 - Last edited on 07-May-2014 03:28:56 by Yusou Bhoroi
Have shown they can play well as a team member.
Have managed a 25 + solo.
Have tried a Quad game.
07-May-2014 02:35:26 - Last edited on 07-May-2014 04:38:27 by Yusou Bhoroi
Be aware of the E/W split.
Be able to apply the o-a-o angle out.
Have 45+ duo, on both colours, with any of the listed*
** target for solo
07-May-2014 02:35:43 - Last edited on 07-May-2014 05:04:10 by Yusou Bhoroi
Be familiar with the basic angles from E.
Have scored 45+ on both colours, from the E position.
Have scored 30 + solo on Air, or Fire, or Nat.
07-May-2014 02:36:01 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 12:10:34 by Yusou Bhoroi
Must be able to describe what Prototiks are, and when they occur.
Scored 50+ duo on both colours, with one of the listed.
Have solo'd 114 GO, on any colour.
07-May-2014 02:36:11 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 12:15:08 by Yusou Bhoroi
Must be able to demonstrate premovement, and explain how to make use of it.
MTI >130 (6a)
Have scored 35 in Air, or Fire, or Nat.
Have duo'd 55 or above, on either colour, with one of the listed.
07-May-2014 02:36:23 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 16:50:24 by Yusou Bhoroi
38 For Air and Fire?
145 or above MTI (6a)
Duo: 58 duo, both colours, Air or Fire?
>235 MTI (6a)
07-May-2014 02:36:39 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 16:49:22 by Yusou Bhoroi
40 or above, on at least one colour, one at least one of the following: Air, Fire, Nat.
Have an MTI (6a) of over 160.
Duo'd 60, with one of the listed.
Duo'd 55+ with somone on the same tier as them.
Be able to describe positions of orbs by notation.
Completed 5 of the 10 set puzzles correctly.
(lolrequirement: Have gained at least 1m tokens. - You'll understand why that's silly, if you've got the score requirements).
07-May-2014 02:37:04 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 12:48:26 by Yusou Bhoroi
43 on at least one colour, Air, or Fire, or Nat*
***;175 MTI (6a)
62 on at least one colour, Air, or Fire, or Nat with listed.
38 on any.
07-May-2014 02:37:18 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 17:00:03 by Yusou Bhoroi
Solo: 45 on at least one colour: Air or Fire or Nat.
Have >185 MTI (6a)
Duo: 64 on at least one colour: Air, or Fire, or Nat*
***;250 MTI (6a)
Have scored 40 in any altar.
Have >160 MTI (6a)
58+ in Air and Fire, on Both Colours.
Have 200+ Duo Mti (6a).
Have tried in both duo and solo forms.
Have tried in both duo and solo forms.
Be familiar with all Gopping mechanics publicly known, and be able to solve puzzles set to test such.
Have brought 5 new people to Gop, and helped tutor them to at least tier 8.
Be crazy and drink tea!
07-May-2014 02:37:36 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 16:49:52 by Yusou Bhoroi
Remember I was mentioning a certain tune, a few weeks back? ..Well, I was talking to friend about it, too, and if you listen to TF for the 1st, I think should be nice supprise.
Not listened yet, but from what they said, it should be there.
Nearly forgot to say! :o
catagories (even if they don't have any).
Single altar max:
(would love avg, but..)
Single Altar Max:
Single Altar Max:
Single altar max:
Single Altar Max:
Single Altar Max:
O C Duo:
Hard to guage, may be better off in Theory.
Have grasped (explaining, in words, their own understanding of, and cases where it applies/is used):
(Master level only):
Have brought people to Gop and helped them.
11-May-2014 17:03:13 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 18:15:09 by Yusou Bhoroi
Actionbar play is important.. but I wasn't sure where best to include it, I need advice on such.
having awareness of some basic/start position pp.
Would love that some original research has to be submitted, along with having done own gridding and spawn studies, but not sure that'd be fair.. especially as it's get harder to do as time went on..
Bearing in mind these things have to be attainable to the reasonably average player, albeit the comp and trimmed are more for Minigame enthusiasts, than average.. they can't really be too restrictive, or they will put people off.
Are reward tasks necessary?.. as they aren't really relevent to the game, and I don't feel we should dictate what people spend theirs on.. however it will probably be expected, and wished for..
However, as a falable system, and with the current token-allocation, does it warrant a place in Gop achievements or skill?
11-May-2014 18:10:08 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 18:17:53 by Yusou Bhoroi
(this should be moving to the Minigames and D&Ds Directory and Chat thread here pretty soon, so bear that in mind, and repost feedback there, if possible, please! )
11-May-2014 18:20:11 - Last edited on 11-May-2014 19:16:22 by Yusou Bhoroi
I'm still thinking 99 should have 40 solo.. it's achievable, given the number who already have it, and would take less than a Year of casual playing, for most Minigamers. The 99 needs to be equivelent to a skill 99, and not something that could be so easily degraded.
That's still allowing many who already know the game to get 99 straight off, even those who don't play the game, (like 5tr, Aimigon (not sure current name), and many others), yet still allow some challenge to get the Master capes.
The Master cape even has things which some players in Gop who are regulars, won't have, and should really be encouraged to do, rather than sitting on one form of achievement. The bringing of new people and helping them is another big thing, though we will have to come up with a way of making sure that people don't preasure people into doing things.
Advantages of each colour, although blindingly obvious to us, is not generally something people become aware of before corner hooking.
I don't really think there is redundancy, if spaced to end at 40/-kr60, or similar, and there are many things in Gop which can fill that gap.
I think that the rest of the theory is very important to be included in the 99 cape, as it is meant to be the end-achievement for most, and it is a vital part of the game. Knowledge of such things are a great help to progressing faster in Gop, as although you may inherrantly pick some things up, it's not always apparent that these things apply universally, within Gop, and can help with other things, too.
I know I come from a community which has always had a different outlook on Gop, from either your own, or the Gioppi-based one (and predecessors), though given that they have largely kept finding it fun, long past other groups, it can't be entirely bad, and it is the one with the longest record of encouraging new players.
12-May-2014 21:55:41 - Last edited on 12-May-2014 21:56:01 by Yusou Bhoroi
should make a list of ppl who weren't ranked, as see them, so can tell if they are updated again.
should make a list of ppl who weren't ranked, as see them, so can tell if they are updated again.
*askieran should probably get added, also, though not got enough info yet on consistency.
Need more info on NeVeR and Raw Fish, both have been helpfull a couple of times, though not seen either enough to know whether they are usually wishing to help out. Given that ranks are meant just to show new ppl who to go to, giving somone a rank if they're not wishing to help, is a bit unfair to them.
28-Jul-2014 03:04:09 - Last edited on 05-Aug-2014 12:53:45 by Yusou Bhoroi
Hallo! Good to see you.
Sorry if that was poke about not being in fc, I'm just finding it hard to cope in there with all the hostility & unhelpfulness. It's not everyone - there are lots of helpful ppl, but it gets wearing, and the helpful are on less often than the unhelpful; it was a lot easier when I could use people from my own group, but without that it's..
Anyway, I hope things are going well, and that cws is entertaining! :p
Take care, and hope to hear from you again, soon!
I hope you're finding happy things, also, and that work isn't too stressfull!
I think you'll find all dog's feet start to bleed after about 30 miles on human paths :/ can be hard to plan routes which avoid them, and it's annoying to restrict ourselves to short distances.
They will even do so on grass and snow, if they're walking for long enough. :o
She's not all that sure about them, but is usually ok, after a while. It'd cause more upset if she wasn't allowed to come, so better off to have them. :p
With regards to resources, they're made from reindeer hide, and were already being used for a blanket, but unneeded - the owner didn't want the horse they had with them carrying extra weight all round the country, so it was better all round to have another use for it! Was good to catch up with them, anyway.
Love and tea to you, too!
Glad to hear you were having some time for living calmly, for a bit, I hope it's helped.
Thanks for the well wishes, and I hope your paperwork gives much interest as well, though won't keep you too busy to enjoy doing other things, too!
Are you likely to be busy in September? can you spare 100-200 hrs to help with something? :o
Many things needing to be done, and might take more time 'off' (work from home), if one or two can be done/progressed with properly.
Haec aegritudo attinet?
It'd have been mit wiki, or with another project. (yet to be decided, but getting one thing done/progressed with.. would be the aim).
As long as we could assign a decent number of hours to it, on a regular basis (I had been hoping every other day.. but could be weekends/2 days a week, if that'd work), I could probably justify, with myself, staying at home a bit longer. - I may end up being so, anyway, for another reason, but that would involve not being online much.
09-Aug-2014 01:42:19 - Last edited on 09-Aug-2014 01:45:34 by Yusou Bhoroi
14-15-62-65449807 - you might find that interesting, as it'd give you a good opportunity to talk about collective influences.
Um, a few things:
Purple is hard to read on the forum backgound.
ASCII and forum art isn't permitted outside certain threads :s if you keep posting it, you might attract the wrong attention, and end up with a mute (will depend on which mod sees.. as they all act differently), they probably wouldn't mind if you made it smaller, as it could be taken for a sig (needs to be 4 lines/ 1 and a half inches, max).
Otherwise, hello! How are you? :
Good to see you posting on that thread, still.
Have made new thread in response to Prinz's (et other ones in the last Year).
Except that Dunge leaching you're paying a team to do the work for you, and you're paying them because they are good at it..
You also have to participate, to an extent.
Q) Now that non-combat Stealing Creation is officially sanctioned, will it be finally ok to advertise some other house rules that are "against the spirit of the game", such as 50/50 GoP games?
Mod Moltare: Win trading is further outside the spirit of GOP than non-combat contests are outside the spirit of SC, so probably not. Do send in the suggestions though!
Wuute! Ty Moltare!
This is probably after reading through things on 15-16-375-65469007. So seems like a good sign. :
Using the following posts to start forming an idea which I can't post on other thread till more done, and I need to keep leaving off. ~
(Gah, missing access to TLR network, atm.. hoping the system isolate is over soon, the bits online are not those I need for this)
16-Jan-2015 19:08:27 - Last edited on 16-Jan-2015 19:37:43 by Yusou Bhoroi
There are certain things to consider here, and I think that, for my own part, my ideas may best be explained by first detailing as many of these (with example) as possible, and then going into the various forms of competition that I can think of, showing which of those things each can fulfill.
Please forgive me if this turns out to be a bad way of laying out the ideas, I may need to come back and completely reorganise, if that should prove the case.
While this is intended as an additional thing to the concurrently running events, and it might be said that those events cover for those who wish to play in a more casual way, it is my opinion that everybody should be considered, where possible, and that any ways of doing competitions which don't exclude portions of people (I'll go into the ways in which that can happen, later on), should be looked into - within the contexts of the aims of the competitions, and the needs of the games and communities.
Other projects for the promotion of enjoyment, increased use, and structures for encouraging competitive play for those interested, for minigames have been attempted, and they too may be mentioned for comparison.
Previous projects which I've been involved with have been put on hold/slower development courses, due to requirements for more administration (
These would probably be desirable, but the competition proposals made will hopefully be another avenue, which will be easier to implement, run, and have good effects; any fruition from their other methods would no doubt compliment any benefits from competitions, should they prove to be an idea worth consideration.
16-Jan-2015 19:56:02 - Last edited on 30-Jan-2015 09:02:58 by Yusou Bhoroi
What can a competition achieve?
Fun thing for those who prefer more structured competition.
Be different from a purely exploratory, or casual event, having set participants, a formal structure, and an end goal. This can help benefit more casual events, too, as it can make sure that both groups of playstyles can be catered for, without upsetting the other.
Be a way for activities without an official highscores to have some sort of official ranking.
Be fair to all the who participate, regardless of skill.
While this has tried to split up the groups of competitors fairly, and make sure all can take part, its size, and inclusion of more casual players, or those who don't use the available sources to keep up with rounds, has meant it has become unwieldy, and is taking a very long time to complete.
Furthermore, even within the groupings, there can be vast differences, and as this is a long duration tournament, positioning within the ranks isn't the aim, as would have been the case in more organised groups, which hold regular tournaments)
17-Jan-2015 09:05:21 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 14:30:49 by Yusou Bhoroi
Make sure that any 'politics' between various users of the content, won't prevent the smooth running of the tournament, or make it invalid. Structuring it in the right way, can avoid this.
Prevent the outcome being a forgone conclusion (Same-old same-old.. only benefits established communities, and only certain parts of those, so novel contests can be fresh, and put people on even footings):
Keep the contest a contest, and make sure that while it supports competitive play, it also allows participants a fair chance of attaining something, if they try hard. If everyone knows who the winner will be, before the start, merely by knowing who is competing, then it's no fun for people to try (even for the winners), and no fun to watch.
Be unusual, or interesting:
To take a different approach to competition, or have an intriguing and lesser used format.
Having an unusual format helps to level the playing field, and relieve the tensions, allowing people to take something lightly. However, it may just give advantage from one group, to another. Making a mixture of formats can, alongside other ability groupings, iprovide more people with an opportunity to do well, as well as giving newcomers a chance to succeed - or at least, hopefully, make it more attractive to take part.
An alternative approach to competition can change what the main aim and focus of the players is, putting more on an equal footing, and allowing tensions to be diffused, or morphed into something else (something that doesn't apply to the usual rifts, so can be taken lightly, or be in the control of others).
17-Jan-2015 09:35:29 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 14:26:59 by Yusou Bhoroi
To increase awareness of the activities' existence, in the absence of active reasons to know of their being. This can have varying degrees of effectiveness, from merely being a footnote, to being active promotion of, or even participation in the competitions; there are now much easier, though more varied, ways of doing this, now, and it'd be counterintuitive to not use the most effective measures now available, especially if the space exists. Things can grow in popularity, rather fast, and unexpectedly - it can only be known if tried.
Be a way to encourage more people to try/use/enjoy the content:
To encourage people who only see the content in a bad way, due to previous encounters, or bad word from those who've had unpleasant experiences, to see the gmae in a different light, so that they may be willing (or eager ) to give the activity another try.
It can also make newer players more aware of the content's uses, and the different ways it can be enjoyed.
Get people following/behind a general movement of fun contests for many parts of lesser-used content:
Build popularity for trying out, and perhaps becoming good at, many of the activities with fewer players, because it's seen as a more worthwhile part of the game (reward rebalancing would work well for that, but so would encouragement from JAGEX to place value on using all bits of content, and becoming adept at them). It would help enspire more competitions, and gather people round supporting older content.
If each is highlighted in the right way, then it would be seen as more worthwhile to do those activities, and help people make use of more content, rather than sticking to only one way of playing. At the moment, lots of good (in some cases, very good) content goes largely unused, merely because it can't help with what's seen as the main aims, even when some would enjoy using that content just as much, if not more, than the mainstream things.
17-Jan-2015 10:03:02 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 14:21:37 by Yusou Bhoroi
This has precedent, though I do not believe it is what should be aimed for, even if it would benefit from CM involvement and organisation.
I will cover novel gameplay forms with this competition from, separately.
There are many disadvantages, and it fails to achieve anything particularly new. It even lacks ease of execution.
It has past tournaments to guide it.
It is simple in basic outline.
It benefits some parts of the competitive communities.
Can showcase the best players, and thus the 'best competitive play',if they choose to participate.
While the structure is simple, there are many ways it can go wrong, and it requires many measures to counter difficulties.
It takes a long time, and is subject to many possible delays.
Lacks complete cover, and cannot fit all in, so is thus invalid for total cover.
Requires people to be available at conflicting times, for long periods, either leading to withdrawal, or extreme length.
Extremely unfair on those who are unable to compete.
Likewise for those who are new, or less experienced.
Discludes new players, unless it takes form of permanent ranking system, which is an enormous undertaking.
Many of the best players would chose not to compete, or may be unaware.
Risks behaviour or attitude problems causing more harm than good, in terms of encouraging new players to try.
Lacks interest for those not involved, if they don't already have an interest - no real reason for people to watch or get involved -
\ without understanding of complexities/tactics/other, it will be dry and boring for those new to the game to watch.
\ experienced players won't train in a way that's any more understandable or entertaining.
\ anything in such line would be a side-thing, and not relate to the competition, or competers, directly.. and would have the same problems with not being interesting in itself.
Scoring methods may be unfair.
17-Jan-2015 10:27:15 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 15:34:29 by Yusou Bhoroi
(not all will be relevant to all forms of competition, and not all are feesable, appropriate, or effective; however, they are listed to act as seeds for further ideas, and to be a note that they have been considered):
For games where score is independent, making people do a match before/early on in the tournament, against anyone (or no one), with it being witnessed by a tournament overseer, so that it can be used in their place, if they are unable to play in one of their matchups.
These have to be predetermined to be backups, and properly witnessed, so that people can't just choose their best performance.
They help a lot with shortening the pereiods required for each round, as it caters for time-maching problems, and can allow for fairer matchups.
Separate scoring system:
Somtehing that goes by a different scoring system than that which is built in to the activity, if that system is either broken, unfair, or unsuitable.
Making it so only people within a certain ability margin, or those from a certain community, can take part.
This is to either make it fairer/target it at the people intended, or to make sure tensions between existing communities won't impact upon it.
Streaming the competitions would allow more to see them, and get involved in following them, perhaps highlighting some of the better play. Commentaries would allow things to be explained in a way that makes it more engaging, or understandable. People can't be excited about something, if they don't know about it, can't access it, or don't understand it.
The streaming would have to be done by a non-competing party, for many activities, as some computers can't handle it, and it wouldn't be fair to distract participants.
17-Jan-2015 10:42:21 - Last edited on 24-Jan-2015 16:56:36 by Yusou Bhoroi
Having post game analysis for some of the more exciting games may allow for the explanation of play, and the complexities behind it.
Having mini side-events related to the competition, which can be enjoyed or watched by more, may help.
Another possibility is having a series of streams which explain the intricacies behind the activities, as well as some of the background behind them, may be better viewing, and more able to convey the interesting information, than streams of the actual competition - at least for some parts. They could be used to actively encourage and enthuse those who are not yet taking part.
This may help with reducing tensions, for some activities, in some contexts - however it's not something likely to be useful in any supported by CM.
Allowing all-comers to participate, but having separate sub-competitions for different groups, either by ability, community, or other.
Gauging the correct value, or worth of any reward (should any be necessary at all), can help with both encouraging participation, and directing it to the right places. It can be used to help avoid cheating, though the effectiveness depends on many variables.
18-Jan-2015 13:48:38 - Last edited on 24-Jan-2015 17:05:09 by Yusou Bhoroi
This revolves around participants doing a set number of games, within the time limit, with any of the other participants (it doesn't matter which, as long as all the games are decided to be contributory, before they start), and an average of the scores, or total of wins:losses, from all the games a participant took part in, is taken, and used to determine the overall winner of the competition.
Any ties are decided either by tie-break factors (how well someone performed compared to their expected performance - relies on pre-existing rankings; smaller point factors, within games, et.cetera), or by matches between tied participants.
This format is sometimes used as an additional format, that runs in parallel with the main competitions (using the scores from the main competition),by a couple of Gop groups, and is the first round elimination/catagorisation-check method for the big annual contest that involves both those groups.
To a certain extent, this type of format can be used to counter timezone difficulties.
It can help more people participate, given playingtime constraints.
While it may seem counterintuitive, and at first complicated for participants, it's relatively easy to understand, once it has been explained.
Requires little involvement from Mods.
* Prizes can be set for catagories within the rankings (if done without saying where, then that can help discourage cheating, however it could cause problems, too).
Due to the mostly dull (and unpredictability of the exciting) nature of most of the matches, it would hold little interest for observers, and thus remove many of the benifits from mediatising them. This negates much of the point behind the idea.
It's not that easy to get people enthused about it, if they're not already into the game.
Because of little involvement and testing of all parts of the activity are done, little useful data can be gathered for future use.
18-Jan-2015 13:48:43 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 16:00:04 by Yusou Bhoroi
It's still open to many of the flaws that can be avoided in a few other formats (to do with scoring, in some activities).
There needs to be a lot of repetitive hands-on overseeing, of all the matches.
It may be hard to balance the number of matches needed per person (so as to avoid too many ties in overall score, and to get a good idea of average performance) with the overall length of the competition.
It's unworkable with a few activities.
res for Standard Contest variations
More things are already done on the next page!
18-Jan-2015 13:48:49 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 16:06:36 by Yusou Bhoroi
These involve teams of 'experienced' players* each bringing (a) new player(s) to the game, and training them up over a set period, ready for a competition between them, at the end. There are various forms of doing this, as well as differing ways to run the contests at the end. However, I believe it's best to cover the options under the two main idea formats, individually.
(*it can be done with beginners, but the problems can be discouraging for newer players, and their ability to train can be less effective, depending on the activity - however, there are good points for that, if it's feesable)
Any comparisons between different styles, or sub-formats of competition, are done with the assumption of CM backing and participation being fully behind them - so as to make an equal comparison between the varying formats, in the context of being an evaluation of the (possible) best way for CM to support a competitive venture for activities, if they should choose to do so (indeed, consideration for all other positives, obtainable through a competition, have been given; though it should always encourage competitive exploration and participation in the activities, where possible - whether in the form of PlayerVplayer, or Player*game).
18-Jan-2015 13:51:03 - Last edited on 21-Jan-2015 14:23:39 by Yusou Bhoroi
-I| Standard Train a Newcommer Format |I-
This has been tried in the past (
The intentions can be:
To bring new people into the game, and get a few of them enthused for the finer 'arts' of play, while still encouraging others to enjoy the game.
Make them feel valued members, who can -
\- join in with existing groups,
\- compete evenly, without feeling unequal,
\- feel they can turn to more experienced players for any guidance they may need.
Encourage groups who are less accepting of newer players to start being more tolerant, and value newer players, both as individuals, and by realising that without them, the activity gradually dies out.
Immediately boost the number of newer players, so that future newcommers have more regular players within their skill horizons.
Work as a boost to newer player numbers by word of mouth, through groups of players who wouldn't otherwise have come into contact with the game.
To give players interested in competition an insight into the world of competitive x.
To give newcommers to the activity a chance to compete in a competition, on an even footing, while still remaining rewarding.
Give experienced players a chance to have a go at teaching -
\- create more teachers, out of the available pool.
\- allow them the chance to follow the teaching process right through (at least to a certain point), which isn't always achievable, otherwise, as newcommers gain advice from all over.
\- help them to see the fun side of helping new players.
18-Jan-2015 13:51:08 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 16:52:43 by Yusou Bhoroi
Ensuring that competitors are truely my new to the game,
\- with past competitions, there, has been a cutoff date
\- using people from real life can work, but then it removes a lot of the in-game benefits benefits (new playerbase recruiting areas, et.cetera.)
\- even if it had official ways of checking, it'd still not be certain.
Timezone/playtime differences can cause great difficulties, even when specifically choosing to match.
Finding teams, both trainers and trainees, who can fit together (for all sorts of reasons) can be hard.
Ensuring an even playing field at the start.
It has a small immediate impact, and most of the effects are subject to many possible hurdles, over a long maturation time.
There would be little interest without an 'angle' to make it relatable/appealing.
Getting a balance for incentive vs risk of cheating.
Having the teams do streams, and (blog*?) updates on progress, could help give a wider audience for the competition, to make it more interesting/followable/relatable.
\- both sides of the teams may be of interest, though the perspective of the trainees will likely be the most engaging.
\- this would give a clearer idea of what is involved in competing in some of these activities, at the 'higher levels', and help make it more interesting.
\- making sure that any materials for learning are made clear, should mean that any who are inspired by the competition can easily try taking up the activities for themselves.
A possible way of spinning it, would be to invite (or even challenge) prominent players, who are either famous for being good at RuneScape, or good at explaining content (or both), to try their hands at some of the 'lesser' parts of content, to see whether they can master them, too (after all, if you're supposed to be good at RuneScape as a whole, then finding out you're a relative novice at whole sections, must be something needing rectifying! ).
18-Jan-2015 13:51:20 - Last edited on 22-Jan-2015 09:41:09 by Yusou Bhoroi
\-these players tend to be on more, so they would be more likely to be able to fit in the training time, is they so wished.
\-it may still be hard to ensure a level playing, but perhaps that would matter less... it's hard to tell what the main focus would be, and that may depend, to a certain extent, upon who takes part, and what they would be willing to accept.
18-Jan-2015 15:00:53 - Last edited on 21-Jan-2015 11:15:28 by Yusou Bhoroi
This would be similar, but would involve members of the CM team participating in the competition, as the 'new' players. This would have the advantages of being a big draw, and having the established systems available that allow for communication, and fairness.
Such a challenge, taken on by Mods, has a precedent, in a way, with things like the Super September challenges, and some of the past CM undertakings, which pit teams of Mods against each other. These have a history of being popular, well set out, and having just the right degree of humour to lighten up the proceedings, while still remaining serious - something players may find hard to do, in the same way.. pokes about eachothers' skill, would likely be taken as insult, whereas with Mods it's understood as good natured.
With it being Mods involved, it would make it more likely to make it through the process, and mean that it'd be the same people exploring all the different pieces of content, in sequence, allowing for more interesting comparisons, and interactions to develope. It would also allow a more direct and useful analysis of the content to happen, giving JAGEX a more in-depth insight into pieces of content, to see and understand what may help it in future updates (however far off they may be), while giving communities the assurance that Mods actually take interest, know what the content means, and even perhaps the comfort of knowing that someone at JAGEX actually cares for 'their' own piece of content, and would stand up for it, in the future.
This version, while it seems a lot to ask, wouldn't involve more input that a lot of the standard formats would do, if they were to be fair, and well run, and could have the advantage of fulfilling far more of the possible advantageous criteria that any competition could do.
I hope to outline the various advantages, and ways it can benefit the content (along with possible problems), over the next couple of posts.
18-Jan-2015 15:01:58 - Last edited on 21-Jan-2015 11:45:09 by Yusou Bhoroi
(This focuses on disadvantages avoided)
With any standard format competition, there will be numerous things that cause them to take up large amounts of time, from both the CM team and any other organisers, not least - all the match ups, the length of time taken to complete the tournament, ensuring fairness, and making sure everyone can participate (each of these things involve many subsidiary concerns, and there are other things too); but the main problems, even if you had the time to invest into all that, are:
That all that effort would be very much 'back room', while actually remaining front seat..
All that involvement, and yet very little of it is noticeable, and CM presence would not be participatory, unless they dedicated even more time, to actually take part, too..
It achieves very little in the way of highlighting how the activity works, or what can be done to improve the content, other than what has already been provided by regular players :- no first hand knowledge, experience, or insight.
Because of the backseat aspect of the participation, it would do little to encourage player participation outside the normal groups for those activities, without giving them anything tangible gained by the process. On top of that, it fails to highlight the competitive aspects of the activities, while remaining 'dry' and boring for those not participating.
Any coverage in streams, or reporting on the events, would be restricted to straight on-looking, and would miss out the majority of the competition, while containing little more to inspire people, or explain what is going on, even if they chose to watch.
If you compare this to the advantages outlined in the opening post for this format, and the following post, then it should be reasonably clear why the Mod training format could prove to be one of, if not the best, option to choose from, out of the ideas so far, if it were decided to try a competitive venture.
21-Jan-2015 12:09:07 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 16:10:26 by Yusou Bhoroi
This, along with the popularization of streaming and challenges, makes it likely that such a format would prove of interest, if handled correctly - something which the CM team are more than capable of doing, with their expertise (providing they have the time, ofc).
The fact that it is the Mods who are competing, in essence, allows them to be in control of the situation, to an extent, and prevents some of the tensions that may be caused by direct competition - any possible ructions caused in other forms of tournament, would be player to player matters, and likely without the presence of Moderators; and, while that's not something unusual in a game, it's better to avoid it, if possible, than not.
This allows those who love the activities the most, and have the wish to share the fun aspects of competitive play, to highlight their content - both to Mods, and to the general playerbase, in the most positive way. It gives the opportunity to explain how the content works, and increase the awareness of this to people who would otherwise not have had the incentive to find out.
The degree in which competitive play is an important part of an activity, can easily dictate the tone of the competition done for each individual activity.
21-Jan-2015 18:24:23 - Last edited on 22-Jan-2015 09:55:41 by Yusou Bhoroi
This form could precede player/community run competitions, or events, as it works as a good way to highlight the content, and get others keyed to try it out themselves; explaining all they need to know for how to participate in the content competitively (as well as just general ideas for how to enjoy the content), while at the same time making sure they know the content is valued, and that JAGEX is aware of any problems it faces (they'll have seen Mods go through the process of experiencing it all).
It could work very well as a stand-alone thing, for each piece of content, too.
It's highly adaptable, to allow it to be used for may kinds of content.
I'll break off there, for tidying up and filling in some of the previous things. As a lot of the advantages of the format are obvious, it won't help to bang on too much about it, and there may be other formats available which are even better, or more convenient.
I hope it is something that could be considered, anyway, and I'll get back to filling in more detail + tidying it up, once the rest has been filled.
22-Jan-2015 09:59:27 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 16:19:08 by Yusou Bhoroi
(As the specifics become more developed, I'll start using this as a contents, to link to separate posts - at the moment, it's merely a list of activities it would easily work for, or be adapted for ((it's limited to basic feasibility, and usefulness to the activities of such a venture, till there's any reason to hope it might be something acceptable)).
[qfc id=]Barbarian Assault[/qfc]
This could even be adapted for things like bosses.. but that's already popular, covered elsewhere, and something people have enough pressure to try out as it is.
26-Jan-2015 16:49:41 - Last edited on 30-Jan-2015 09:52:12 by Yusou Bhoroi
(Some quite detailed notes left, though I'm not so good with translating them).
However, the organiser had to give up playing RuneScape (they had terminal illness), so there haven't been any more open-run attempts, so far (though we'd love to try, and it'd work better either with help, or in the 2nd format, to encourage more players).
26-Jan-2015 16:49:54 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 17:06:04 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Has players who are willing (and eager) to teach new players (and likely wishing to take part in a joint effort, if that's possible).
- Is one of the more complex and interesting minigames, with many established tactics, and ways of countering them, to learn ~ so would fit the full structure very well.
- Suffers a lot from glitches ~ so experiencing how they effect gameplay would help with finding solutions, or at least making workarounds known, so people can play if they wish to.
- Is often boosted, rather than played * so could really benefit from a trend for playing.
- Already has a fairly good point giving, and high score system.
26-Jan-2015 19:16:32 - Last edited on 28-Jan-2015 11:53:36 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Has dedicated teaching groups, and many veterans who could be encouraged into valuing newer players, given the right cues (many help out sporadically, but can give in to peer pressure from those who don't, given a situation where it is seen as worthwhile, many would likely take up the opportunity, which would allow a more self-sustaining group of newer players to establish).
- Is incredibly complex for the time allotted for decisions, when all the mechanics are taken into account when playing (even more so, when you go into the theory, and add-ons.. though the depth into which some of these things would be explored, wouldn't be to that extent, most likely) ~ ideal target for helping people discover the intricacies of content, and (dare I say it) the worth of exploring it, and taking it on as a challenge.
- There aren't many game-impacting problems in the playing mechanics (only very minor ones, or ones which impact newer players more, but are game-wide issues), but there are many problems with the reward system ~ which could best be experienced in context, and thus allow user perspective on which fixes are likely to work best and how best to structure the rewards to encourage play.
- Is often played as 5050, rather than competitively (or rather: people come with the preexisting intention to do that, and have to be teased out of it to come to try, and thus enjoy the content) ~ so would benefit greatly from encouragements for playing.
- Lacks a highscores, so more (and official) ways to play competitively would be of benefit. The reward allocation system is somewhat broken, as it rewards non-play more than play, when taken as an average, or when starting out (and thus forms habbits/lack of willingness to try). Giving people a reason to try (playing) the game would be of help in encouraging this to happen.
26-Jan-2015 19:18:57 - Last edited on 29-Jan-2015 10:47:52 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Has an active fanbase, who enjoy playing it, and are willing to help those who are new, if they wish to play; however it suffers from tensions caused by those wanting to go there to not-play, and their negative impacts upon those trying to play.
- Has many tactics, and things to help with gameplay, and (as with the other games mentioned so far) very few people are aware of them, or how fun the game can be to play ~ thus it's a good candidate, as people being more aware of what's involved, and how fun that can be, would likely encourage some to take part; showing that their is an art behind it, will draw those who like to perfect skills.
- Numerous problems which have never been addressed, along with some minor ergonomic 'failings', though many of those actually add to the intricacies of play ~ to really understand which are which, and what to do to repair things, requires a good understanding of how the game works, what's enjoyable about it, and what it feels like to play it both for fun, and competition.
- Many of those commuting to the game, do so without the intention of trying it ~ showing the value of the game, and the depth of fun in it, could encourage more to try.
- The game has suffered from most rewards being too quickly obtainable, since they were decedecimated, along with few return incentives. The point system is also skewed away from rewarding complete play ~ the best ways to improve this, could be best found by experiencing the content fully, and in a competitive spirit.
needing to concentrate on other things, so will redo these sections when more time.
26-Jan-2015 19:20:07 - Last edited on 29-Jan-2015 12:40:38 by Yusou Bhoroi
(Can do competitive scouting/tagging races, as are done by some groups.. techniques could be taught before the competition, though this would likely be a short one, it's hard to know. Will try asking around )
Many companies have sports, or gaming teams, whether competing internally, or externally - RuneScape has ready made opportunities, in house, and on tap! Making use of them might encourage others to do the same.
As far as the ideas proposed here are concerned, who wouldn't want to be paid to have fun? .. especially when you can have great effect, and be doing a great job, by doing so?
(Sorry for being cheeky, it's well meant )
While allowing non-imperitive play to be rewarded in competitive contents is, in some ways, an understandable policy, where it impacts negatively upon those who wish to try the content, as has been the case in every minigames it's been done with, so far, then this is both unfair, and a waste of content.
This is especially so when it is both easier, and more rewarding (either entirely, or by effort put in), to occupy the content, but not use it.
Problems self perpetuate, and expand themselves, as they encourage culture and mindset of not using, or not trying content.. and those who do want to play, know they have little chance of being able to, so don't try.
The best way to find a compromise that will work (rewarding competition, without penalising newcomers, or forcing them into non-participant forms), while being fair to all, is to truely experience all the forms of play. This way would have the benefit of giving awareness of, and encouragement for, content usage, and the benefits and values of doing so.
Even without any content changes coming from this, the awareness and value-giving aspects of such a project would be more than worth it (as far as I can see).
26-Jan-2015 19:24:42 - Last edited on 29-Jan-2015 13:00:23 by Yusou Bhoroi
1: Because other playstyles are already catered for, at present, by the other events, and people going there to take it 'serriously' are likely often making others feel uncomfortable, when they're just there to relax and lark about. Having places where each can do what they wish, without impacting the other, is a good compromise - perhaps each will then grow to appreciate eachothers' playstyles more, when their not seeing mixed events as the only possible way to get to play.
2: That's what I never get about the other groups.. so quick to criticise in a non-constructive way, and get angry with new ppl.. yet they're extremely disorganised and unwilling to play much, themselves.. has taken a lot of getting used to. :c
3: You'd have a fair chance of beating Finsk-Tommi, or Ali, in the right circumstances, and I'm hoping that others may come out of the woodwork, if there was any such tournament.. but I'd rather it was focussed on showing newer players that the competitive side can be fun, welcoming, and worthwhile.. You know as well as I do, that many who come, wish to play more, but get put off by a few of the less pleasant/welcoming players, or by not having 100s of people at a similar stage who are there to play with. (That, and the fact that there's very little reward to stay on for).
4: I think that varies, from group to group.. and often newer players, and those who help out most, seem to enjoy trying new things, too.. it's more those who feel they have something to prove, who are really anti unusual things.
5: Having an accurate and ongoing highscore system, is a big undertaking, as most new players change rapidly, and are unable to keep in touch with admins, with some systems - automating takes a lot of the effort away, but then you have to have one which can detect different playforms and circumstances, et.cetera.
6: Allcomers is an Americanism - it just means all who turn up, regardless of ability.
7: Ja, though there are problems even with that - needs to be people who'll appeal to all players (whether individually, or between the teams), and they need to be folks who are willing to spend the time at the games (all of them, so it's a follow-through process).. which would amount to a lot of playtime.
8?: Boring to watch - and I don't just mean for GOP. If there's nothing inherrantly exciting, relatable, or understandable (a majority of the strategies and techniques that are used, won't be), then people will not watch it. It needs to be something that all, or at least the majority (and the majority won't have seriously tried the minigames competitively), will find appealing, and easy to follow - the teaching process, along with relating to other humans doing it, is precisely that.
I think that with GOP (and some other minigames), reward isn't directly related to effort, or skill (in fact, in some ways, it's the opposite), which is the problem - you get rewarded for avoiding playing it, more than you do for actually playing it.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback; it's still unfinished, but hope I'll be able to work things in with greater clarity.
Just out of interest, do you have any novel ideas that you think might be interesting, for us to do? Never know, if have time, might be able to try a few things.
28-Jan-2015 11:47:26 - Last edited on 28-Jan-2015 11:47:38 by Yusou Bhoroi
Not given you much info, but anything crazy usually goes.
(Bear in mind I can't afford to replace the organ, and would probably get fired even if I could ).
I'll email some of the details, if time, and as they're confirmed (unfortunate the problems with things.. not even sure it'll be happening, if can't find solutions :/), don't really want to be giving them on here.
If you're on, there are a couple of players who you'd probably enjoy meeting.. my mind has gone blank on the one who is sticking around most (always, the more I think, the more it goes. *Dreadnite), but Ed Force One expressed interest in commuting back for more, later (for fun ). Cosmic is possibly still on, too, he's there for robes, but wishes to learn a bit while getting them.
I'll edit the name in if I remember and have another free bit (probably be tomorrow morning/mid day ish, as I'm going to be needed for the next bits). Hope you have a good night, anyway. Have care, and make care.
Wow, these meds make me so tired.. only been up 38, and feels more like 70 odd, think will have to have some rest. :/
28-Jan-2015 21:23:18 - Last edited on 29-Jan-2015 13:15:57 by Yusou Bhoroi
However, I have faith in beneficial changes commuting from this, as was seen with things like Mod Lee's first events, when he joined JAGEX: Many small, and easy changes to a few activities were made, after the events. Things that we'd been asking for Years to be done, both on the forums, and in but reports.. yet it took someone at JAGEX to actually encounter them, and understand how they impacted play, for them to be dealt with.
While far more such things still exist, and would only be 'contacted' with deeper use, it's good to see that first hand experience really helps in understanding problems, in whatever way they are come to. As I've said, in my opinion, even without this hope, the many of their benefits would warrant some such programme (or the variations mooted), even if each were taken individually, so I really think that some form of deep/exhaustive-contact fuselage of the content, would prove benificial on so many levels, and make either content, or culture (or both!), at the end of it, which would be the best in RuneScape.
-is totally biased- :
Once it's known whether/how much support from CM team would be available, then I can set about approaching those interested in helping with such things, and the formation of setups for the best ways to do whichever is chosen (if any) for each activity.
29-Jan-2015 12:58:13 - Last edited on 30-Jan-2015 09:55:26 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Has a fanbase who play just for fun, and have a great tolerance of those wishing to play too, there seem (this is just going by my own experiences, and that of a couple of firends; though I'm well aware that single experiences can be misleading!) to be fewer here willing to share knowledge, though ~ so encouragement for helping others may well promote that.
- There are quite a diverse range of tactics used, and little extras that few seem aware of, many of which could be helpful to know, if explained well ~ so following the teaching process would help make people aware of them, and see what fun it can be to play, perhaps encouraging the willingness to try it out.
- There a quite a lot of problems with the game, with various glitches, and a few problems with the overall mechanics (turn 'glitch' being one of the most serious, in that it's impossible for those who experience it to play fairly, as it's a game-engine or rendering problem, which makes it obvious who is a player and who isn't. It isn't their fault, but it means they actively have to ignore it to allow actual gameplay) ~ detailed experience of these problems could lead to sollutions.
- Suffers from non-play being more 'efficient' than play ~ encouragement to try, and extolling the values of, active play, could lead to a change in general attitudes, and thus more using the time to have fun, even when going for xp.
- The rewards are already very good, however there could be something done to r*tweak the balancing, to allow play to be at least as efficient as non-play * which would be easier with a full understanding of all the ways it can be used.
29-Jan-2015 13:24:18 - Last edited on 30-Jan-2015 09:51:08 by Yusou Bhoroi
It's good to see that the benefits aren't entirely in my head (), though we'll have to wait and see whether, and what what sort of thing C.M. may be willing to support. I've passed the qfc and explanations to some in the Conq teaching circles (not got to most, yet), and poked a little towards discussions with competitive Heist players, but am unsure of how far to ask people (yet), because of not wishing to get people's hopes up (or indeed waste their time on reusability and adaptations, at this stage - even if we could muddle through a less-benificial, and less well run version for ourselves, at a later date).
However, all and any feedback would be helpful, as it can assist with choosing and designing the tournaments; show solidarity and determination; and give better ideas.
When we've got all groups on board, and have deliberated a basic format, I think a dedicated thread, with proper sections for each group (oh' the joys of being able to link to individual posts - should allow that to be manageable with several section posters), would work better in explaining the format, along with how it applies to each activity, and the benefits it could bring (whichever type is chosen).
04-Feb-2015 12:01:35 - Last edited on 04-Feb-2015 12:02:17 by Yusou Bhoroi
Until I know what/if support can be given, and for which forms, then it's hard to design a thread to cater for it, as they're very different in organisation (even though there are similar aspects in common, they have to be in different places and forms). Not wishing to poke too many folks, at this stage, if there won't be support, as even if we can get a bodged version for ourselves, it would need a lot more groundwork done before incorporating groups (needs to get streamers, and ways of doing it unobtrusively and low-demanding; competers organised and formalised - which would take a lot to fit in varying groups to the timetables of a few people with the same times.. and long term availability and willingness; et.cetera.) which is built-in if CM.
Forum and Wiki usage needs to be done right, too (need to promote the JAGEXWiki >:
Not wishing to make then hurry decisions, but just trying to get as much useful stuff done as possible (most things differ too much in execution, depending on outcome, to do before, so 'doing them' wouldn't be useful).
Anywhu, there may be a few empty posts, for a couple of pages, as I test outlines of stuff for spacing, before editing out.
07-Feb-2015 19:34:17 - Last edited on 07-Feb-2015 19:48:46 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Explaining and detailing what the competition from is, and how to set about setting one up.
- 'Recruiting' various activities' communities to assist CM, where appropriate (some forms require whole groups' cooperation, whereas others merely that of a few organisers).
- Establishing the duration and organisation for each tournament, based on prospective participation, and form of competition.
- Space for rules, details on timing*, requirements, contacting, listing participants, responses, keeping track of outcomes, and so on (for some competition forms, it will be necessary to have separate threads for the formation, and the actual live thread) , for each individual activity. Spacing for which varies too much between forms and activities.
Having looked at various competitions, and looked into different ways of presenting the different possible forms, none of the sections abovementioned seem to have enough crossover, other than in extra-necessary formatting - such as uniform (or indeed, diverse, where distinction between various activities is needed) titling, colouring, bulleting.
It's therefore impossible to do much, without at least knowing which form I should be making an example for.. doing multiple forms isn't doable, with the amount of free time I have (it'd take nigh on a Year, to do all possible forms of those already described, with disregarding other uses I need to put that time to - though I may be getting more free time, soon.. a lot is semi-free, and I can multitask some things, but not others).
A compromise would be to choose one form, the form which would be the choice for independent adaptation, and make an outline for that - at least so far as supported and independent versions overlap (and that, in itself, is very limiting). At least then, something is being done, and hopefully won't be useless in the long run.
Brief welcome, skuumur introduction, and link to introduction.
Contents links, opening and general.
Link to Activities Contents.
(Brief mention of one contact method)
Introduction and explanation.
Link to deep-pages (deep into thread), further reasoning in why this format is particularly beneficial, and in what ways (which also will link to FAQ).
Link to FAQ (links to ways to give input on overall structure).
10-Feb-2015 15:06:17 - Last edited on 11-Feb-2015 15:34:49 by Yusou Bhoroi
Reminder of the overall things and roles needed.
Posts dedicated to each overall role (one-two for each); with descriptions of the role, its requirements, and then a list of those volunteering for the roles, and a list of those confirmed. Some, if it is independent, may need multiple people for the roles such as recorders, promoters, streamers, et.cetera.
10-Feb-2015 15:07:18 - Last edited on 11-Feb-2015 15:35:17 by Yusou Bhoroi
Introduction to the participants page, along with brief reminder of roles, and reasons for the importance of continuity.
-Posts by the individual participants, largely left up to themselves, but should be introductory - explaining who they are, why they decided to take part, and have links to their later pages, progress, outsourced things, et.cetera.
-Brief explanatory post for each participant, with similar links, or with links to their own deep-pages, where they manage such things themselves.
10-Feb-2015 15:07:59 - Last edited on 11-Feb-2015 15:36:05 by Yusou Bhoroi
* Activities post, explaining that there are numerous different activities involved.
* Explanation and suggestions for how things can be adapted whilst still fitting in with the format.
* What is required by activity communities wishing to take part, along with ways to contact for support in organising a proposed format.
Contents for the Activities.
One post for each activity (with reserves for more activities), with brief explanation, and link to their main pages' introduction post. These could be later used for dates and results.
10-Feb-2015 15:36:09 - Last edited on 11-Feb-2015 15:36:31 by Yusou Bhoroi
Pages dedicated to the further explanations of benefits (what it hopes to achieve, and how).
Contact details and restrictions for privacy, where appropriate.
Any additional information and explanation.
10-Feb-2015 15:43:39 - Last edited on 11-Feb-2015 15:36:52 by Yusou Bhoroi
Personal pages for participants (reserved by themselves).
These would probably work better on the Wiki, if independent - allowing for more space, easier navigation, and more formatting options/personalisation. However that may allow for disruption.. so balance would be needed (or security methods, which would probably have to be a dedicated volunteer to moderate wiki pages for the competition, as permissions don't allow for anything in-built, as far as I'm aware).
10-Feb-2015 15:51:06 - Last edited on 11-Feb-2015 15:37:10 by Yusou Bhoroi
Pages dedicated to each Activity. Giving the details on their format,
arrangements, individual timing*, records, links, etc.cetera.
Would be good to link back to relevant pages covered, especially those of participants (the posts relevant to that activity).
Estimate two to three pages, for each activity.
These could either be left for them to organise, entirely, or they could have the opening post reserved by one of the main organisers, with titling and brief intro, with the rest being for the activity organisers and adapters to manage amongst themselves.
There are particular parts of these (details of outcomes, for instance) which will need individually linking to, from the main contents pages, as well as their own.
10-Feb-2015 15:59:17 - Last edited on 11-Feb-2015 15:38:09 by Yusou Bhoroi
As I get the time, I'll concentrate on expanding and tidying what's in this draft plan, as well as fitting in anything missed out. However, this is all I have time to do, for now.
Styling can either be decided here, or outsourced.
Discussions, and hammering out adaptations for activities, can be done elsewhere (than the thread proposed), at least at first, so that it can be posted in-format. After that, they could perhaps take place there, as links can be made to the finished results (if another thread is used for such discussions, then it can be linked to in the appropriate places).
Mooting the idea for next charity event:
How do you feel about 24hr sponsored orb score?
This would be based on MTI, so would be fair for each player, and a sponserable challenge (especially within the Gopping communities) and people could either sponsor by overall score (saying an extra x gp, for every x orbs scored past the designated target), or could be done on an hour by hour basis (how many hours in succession, in which they can manage to score above a set hourly limit).
This would be a relatively easy thing to work, in that it's for charity and people's effort will directly impact their ability to raise more money - so it complies with standard sponsorship traditions. There aren't really any other workable ideas, other than donating all money gained (which is limited by number of players, doesn't require effort, and isn't a challenge), or people competing for a prize to donate.. which doesn't work much as it's going to be donated anyway, and it doesn't matter who wins as there is only one choice of outlet to donate to (so they don't even get a choice of charity to give to, by winning).
As it seems the only way of keeping an open limit on the amount able to be donated, and that effort links entirely to the ability to donate more (added bonus that there would be lower tensions caused between people taking part, and no real way to cheat. + any disruptors would easily be reportable under the rules, without need for extra explanation, or it causing too much on-going disruption to the targeted party - due to the only reason to disrupt would be to disrupt, which is reportable, rather than ambiguous accusations over one-upmanship).
At least starting to think about it now, let's us gauge a good scale of orbs to score against MTI (although would be even easier if your group also kept averages..)
A good way to involve Gop as a viable charity money raising activity, rather than forcing Goppers away from Gop, if they wish to raise money.
We can also donate money made from play, but as a bonus.
I put forward the creation of the acc name 'GopCommunity', if it turns out to be diplomatic to put all donations from one user, so as to make it equal - that would also give more advertising to Gop as a whole, and give the credit to both it, and unified community.
03-Mar-2015 19:41:01 - Last edited on 03-Mar-2015 19:46:11 by Yusou Bhoroi
Interactive Server/Ongoing Server Events
Proposal for Train a Player/JMod Competitions
Community-run (but hopefully supported) Activity Achievement Sets.
All geared towards the highlighting of Activities, Improving of them, Increasing awareness, and Making them a more relevant and valued playstyle.
If the competition aspectc is to not have CM involvement (which would be bad, and remove many of the benifits), then there will need to be a thread for proposing, recruiting, and designing.. so that there's a full structure available to make which parts of it can run as community-run, run. Run.
It will also need a lot of recruitment for the Activity sets to work, as it involves a lot of work for those who are, after all, playing a game, and not doing a job. Hoping that now I've got back to having a little more time, I can get back to doing these things more actively.. though unfortunately, I have to be covering more in chat, due to us having lost a lot of helpers (problem is.. the longer these things are left undone, the more we lose compared to those coming in, and the more desperate the situation becomes.. requiring the things more, but also giving more excuse to pretend they aren't needed, as no one interested... I really dislike how the way people ignoring the situation, when it has a huge chunk of support, gradually get a stronger footing, merely by dint of them having ignored it causing there to be fewer and fewer supporters, due to atrophy and their prevention of new people getting to support it) - we need to get more helpers in, to allow free time to work on improving the situation..
Xiao has quit, recently, and was one of the big helpers.. the situation gets worse, as we have fewer helpers on (mostly due to some being away short/long term), and those left get more depressed about the situation, and despair to the point of giving up.. exacerbating the problem - the fewer helpers there
I wish *'corzhai was here, still, as he seems to have been the only one capable of holding it all together at a viable, and self-sustaining level.. a sizable chunk quit when he went, and that left the population of helpers at an unviable level. I can't get folks to come in to help, from any group.. and can't get those from the open groups to help.. so it seems pretty hopeless, if we leave it as it is.. at least he could 'make' clanfolks help out (after all, that's why I and a couple of others are here (life commitments allowing), and what's kept a couple of others in back-seat roles), I have no chance there, and being middleman is just no fun, at all. He was also a great deal better at getting much parallel done in short time, and Idk how he ever managed to do so much.
Sorry for the rant, but we really need to act, and act now, if we're ever going to see anything that actually helps the content get done. It needs a concerted effort from those of us left (and free), and we need to stop waiting for those busy to be free.. as we're losing those free, faster than those busy come back. Not sure if we'll manage that without regular Gop fixes, for addiction, but need to use more time on it.
Very tired atm, so this is probably very badly cohesed. -rambles ineffectual-
Just a call for help, and definites given on what each can do in particular, rather than just general offers. Putting the guide projects on long-term hold, till the rest of this is sorted.
Take care, all, and I'll begin planning for the three point thread layout. Perusing someone else can at least post one of the sections for it, so that maintenance for that is taken off my hands, and a joint front will also highlight solidarity + community action.
In bad mood, so posting rantily. Sorry.
(This medication is very irksome, getting so tired and bad tempered, yet can't sleep properly - which is a problem, considering I'm already having 6/48 hrs assigned to sleeping, and not getting it is not exactly optimal).
Oh, and no joy l, so far, on finding that programme.. the online stuff doesn't seem to cover that far back.. Will keep looking, when free time (though should be spending it on threadstuff), and hopefuly it'll turn up, or someone will have the info.
09-Mar-2015 20:53:53 - Last edited on 09-Mar-2015 20:59:11 by Yusou Bhoroi
Have you checked in Death Erebus FC? There should be folks willing to help, there, or at least ones who can contact those who're willing to help.
I wish you luck, and hope you have a good time completing the task!
(I'll be on in about 32 hrs, so if the worst comes to persist, then you can always get it done, then, if you're on ).
Was nice to meet you, in-game, Wilijam!
Edit: random squiggles
((o.o))~~~~~.... The scream...
01-Apr-2015 11:07:37 - Last edited on 01-Apr-2015 11:10:07 by Yusou Bhoroi
Also @Mod Cuppa, please don't ruin afking in minigames, or assume the community wants it. It's often the afkers who allow others to start/play minigames and have proper fun.
Following this logic:
Shop owners should beg police to not removd thieves from their stores, becsause having thieves in their stores makes them look popular..
Regadless of the fact they lose everything they have to sell.. regardless of the fact people who wish to buy things are put off by both the lack of anything left, and the behaviour of the thieves.
Stores should, apparently, also be giving out free stuff to people who use rival stores.
What a great, and sustainable, business plan..
I hope they feel minigame playing supportive, though their comments were a little out-dated, in terms of major reward draw.. so maybe it's not a recent thing.. who knows; it's a positive, either way.
Have seen a couple of nice-ish FoG threads (dark brassica's seems ok), though I'd rather the ideas were more influenced by regular players, as well as less frequent ones, as both views make relevant points.
and ja.. that's the problem with boosting.. you get the reward without playing, so have no reason to even try playing, as you get no reward for it, once you've already boosted, so it actually is a waste of time, if you're working on the main game.. (an unhelpful thing to be 'working on').
This is like if Great Orb Project and Stealing Creation had a baby together.
One for the scrapbook.
02-Jun-2015 03:15:39 - Last edited on 02-Jun-2015 03:16:52 by Yusou Bhoroi
That said, getting the 1k from a more active thing, is good.. at least you get the majority of the points faster, by being active..
Sentient lighgning can presumably be sentient anywhere tzhere is charge.. Idk..
Parasites may be used by Airut, for food.. in that way Tuska uses them to fuel her security system.
We are judging the Astromancer's etuics based upon our own World's, not one from which other creatures are genuinely dangerous and hostile (thus selectively promoting uncaring anddefensive traits); one with great lack of knowledge, and with poor ways to collate and teach that knowledge, when it is discovered (along with many more ways in which that knowledge can be lossed); where there are very powerful and controlling beings, who set up as deitific, and where all organisations of learning and power follow their jealous and confident example.
You also seem to forget that a lot of the knowledge you so proudly tout about having access to, and having known, comes almost entirely from far more suocking and wrong methods, even in times when we've known far better than anyone on RuneScape could possibly have the chance to know, exactly how wrong it is..
If you took away all knowledge you've gained through such methods, then you'd know far less than they did.. they may have other possibilities open to them, but cannot see them, know about them, or know they are better (or even have the ability to care whether they are better), with out the enormous, astronomical, benifit and privilaged advantage of moral knowledge hind-sight... stuff we'd never even have, without having gone through a similar process..
They are actually thinking far in advance of what we were thinking at similar stages, even when we had the enormous advantage of lack of inbuilt preassures to prevent it, and lack of life-experience preassures, or disruption of knowledge..
You need to be fairer in understanding that they cannot possibly know things and how to do them, without trying certain things, and can't get to the point where morality is selected for, without having
That was the context by which I phrased 'moral'.
(Sorry, not fundtioning smoothly, as I've been up 80 odd hrs, due to missing sleep last cycle (due to car thing), talking and thinking is not one of the functions left running, though thankfully I can still music. ).
Got a few maybe 4 more hrs work, then will be sleeping, but will get back to help out after.. sorry about not being on.. had planned to be for spotlight, but work stuff always seems to have other ideas, when I set aside time. Think ppl notice I'm 'free' for nice chunk of time, so decide to nick me for a bit. (Happens during 'holiday' too) :#
29-Jun-2015 11:42:38 - Last edited on 29-Jun-2015 18:44:47 by Yusou Bhoroi
Also Miyamoto Musashi is considered somewhat insane, as the true art in battle is to subdue opponents without causing them harm. It tames enormous skill to last moments in battle, it takes greater skill to kill enemies while doing so; even more skill to survive this while protecting yourself from lasting injury, likewise for protecting your allies at the same time. Maling a difference on the battlefield, alone, is nigh impossible.
Managing to survive, protect allies, make a difference and take down many of the enemy, while not giving lasting hurt to any, is what really matters. Even most who are the best in fighting, would soon die if they attempted to do this once, let alone if they did it continuously, or when outdumbered.
There are very different, and interesting sayings, that exist for those who live by such aims.
On another topic: Timo. We need to do a Gameblast charity event. I am thinking that doing Gop the entire weekend, with the highest RO achieved by the person in question being what counts, and the sponsership being per orb scored for that Round (or even game).
It would be good if we could get a JMod to be the one being sponsered, as that would garner a lot more sponsership, and also help the plight of happiness through minigames.
Would you be willing to help with these aims?
Getting goppers to sponser would be a big boost to the likelyhood it might happen. As the Tea Tourney seems to have stopped, and most have had their money payed back, the remainder is still enough to cover maybe 5m/orb scored, if it's around 120 score. I can possibly double that.. I think if we can get a decent start on potential sponsership, then it would help with persuasion.
31-Jan-2016 14:16:05 - Last edited on 31-Jan-2016 14:20:48 by Yusou Bhoroi
I think it's partly a case of habbits being formed, and then permitted to take the leading role behind how newer stuff is developed (thus inforcing, and suplorting the habbits), and partly because they get to do something they've been acclimatised to seeing as fun, while also getting a game-reward at the same time - reward for doing it = do more of it.
I find doing active things fun, so I get my positive feedback from that, hence why I do it, most likely (though it's not always fun, if you end up never getting to do it for yourself, it's good to do it to encourage others to try it, and find it fun).
I think part of the problem stemmed from the average age of people playing, passing into exam/study/Uni/work brackets, so people did afk things while they were busy, and got rewarded for it (levels. Though the irl stuff may factor as a reward, too). Thus they formed a habbit for it, and tried doing other stuff, like watching vids, while afk.. which in turn adds to reward, and habbits.
JAGEX noticed this trend, and instead of combating it, embraced it, and made it more and more rewarding (to me, it seems meaninglessly, but that's just me, and I know I'm odd), so more and more do it. It becomes less and less fun to play actively, if there are fewer active players to play with - especially if it's activities where people afking can prevent fun use of content, or use at all.
A lot of content targeted as Active-play, has a built-in self-toxic system, which rewards afk over playing use of the content, this means people afk it, thus preventing fun and llay for those who try.. the triers give up, and either never return (and spread word not to go, if you want to play), or turn to afking as well. This means it's even harder to play or have fun, so more leave/afk, and newcommers don't ever get the opportunity to like the content. More and more who turn up, do so with the intent to afk, further imbalancing it.
31-Jan-2016 18:19:25 - Last edited on 31-Jan-2016 18:20:42 by Yusou Bhoroi
This reflects the situation in active-content, in that proportionately more of these players leave, than afk groups, and less positive word is spread to their peers, fewer newcommers are attracted for it, or stay if they like active play, thus the situation self-amplifies.
Afking already acts as it's own reward - getting something for nothing, and indeed having the bonus of reward feedback from whatever you're doing afk. As such, it needs to be actively combated in game, just in order for there to be an equal balance between afk and all kinds of non-afk. If you simply try to be as fair to afk, as active, afk will gradually take over
- let alone the current situation where afk is encouraged, and indeed has the massive advantage of being able to disrupt active play in active content (for more reward than active play there), while active play does not disrupt afk, and indeed cannot even be accomplished on afk content (unless you think intently watching paint dry is something you can get more than a few 10s of hours worthwhile experience out of, at most).
Yes the game does need to be balanced. Yes the game does need to have afk methods that aren't disruptable. Yes people are more busy these days.
But that is exactly what active players want. What they don't want is afk to be more rewarding than active play, when the afk is done in active content (if would help if effort put in, equated reward).
I think the big clincher has been that afk content is easier to produce, so they get more money for the development effort.. unfortunately it turns RuneScape into a niche afk game, with bossing being the only alternative.
This is just one way of the current situation maming sense..
Ah, sorry for not catching this before now****. Is there a program available online that checks for updates on these forum posts and mails me when there is? (Don't look in to it. I'm just asking to cover the low-probability event that you actually knew of such a program already.)
Ja, though using it will get you banned. Can't use software that automatically sends requests to the servers, as it's automated traffic = not allowed.
You can, however, do one which leeches off the archiving systems, or join a group which uses one which will go via pages visited by other members (it can take the info already requested by players in the group, as and when they visit the site).
This is very interesting! I want to learn more about them. Do you have examples of such sayings? : )
Not many are ones I can understand, and translation is difficult, as you get double meanings, and there is a lack of words, terms, expression, and feelings, in English..
There can be no winners, once a fight begins.
more - There can be no sense of having done the right thing, applied, when a fight happens.
(hard to express, as the concepts don't exist to us, and the grammar is just different)
There is no blood inside those who wait.
(can't get the meaning across with that one, it needs custom understanding.. it sounds the opposite of the meaning, in English - it's more that blood outside opponents is just not.. and taking the right moment to avoid that, or not at all).
War is a process of changing ideas through teaching, and they should be more when they end, than they were at the start.
Basically, the 'enemy' may not realise your reasons for 'consenting' to partake in war with them, and may never know. They will have a long-drawn process, which they may not understand, and may see as stalemate, they won't lose anything they understand as loss, yet will understand more by the end of it.
"I have told him of Elieiurq C*ampteng', it is up to him how he interprets this." It would seem you have already come across one of these sayings, before - one that derived from a disappearance of an army. You may have taken it to mean they were annihilated, when perhaps they were subdued, though still through combat.
08-Feb-2016 13:28:15 - Last edited on 08-Feb-2016 13:31:20 by Yusou Bhoroi
It's also a problem when people who have little experience in interacting, emmulate this, and just do the same mechanical actions, which without a connection, cause aversion in the majority - even if the short-term effect seems positive, and spreading, it can lead to long term (and more difficult to overcome) opposition.
There is also the factor of where a person who is you will be best fitting in - there may be some courses of action which are 'best for your cause', and would be the most efficient if you were someone else, but which (due to both personality & representation, and the efficiency of still carrying enough 'warm feels' to aid your carrying on) are actually not-so, for the person you are, and a different (seemingly less efficient) role, may be one best suited to you.
Encouraging someone more suited to the optimal role, to take that role, is often better. Especially if you don't convey your complete intentions, as well as they may do.
You can see part of this in action, when you look at the amount of hate created in the cause of misunderstanding of 'tolerance', in all places it is advocated (some more than others, and likely the opposite of what you can make yourself see).
Try to apply answers as a definition of cake. Reverse method, reflected point.
10-Feb-2016 15:10:06 - Last edited on 10-Feb-2016 17:58:22 by Yusou Bhoroi
If that can be detrimental, or can prevent insights and further progression (even when not effecting the standard effectiveness), then it may be better to take another approach.
Ah, and I should mention, because I see that my meaning could be misunderstood, that I don't quote Musashi because I approve of cutting people, but rather because it's a nycce reminder that I need to remember the purpose of my activities while doing them. If one forgets the purpose (i.e. ''cutting the enemy'') of one's activity, one ends up optimising one's actions based on what seems like appropriate actions, instead of optimising one's actions based on the purpose of the activity. For example, a teacher that forgets that the purpose of what they're doing is to teach children will end up doing teacher-like actions instead of the actions that are best at teaching children.
-wonders whether you've found the point of my earlier posts, yet-
(the clue is in that I was already aware of the secondary meaning, and your usage of, the quote).
03-Mar-2016 20:50:59 - Last edited on 03-Mar-2016 20:55:28 by Yusou Bhoroi
Oh, and I had not seen your reply, last time I looked! I'll reply anon (though will check if I ended up replying to that in E-mail form, first).
Cake is not just a sum of constituents, nor even that + a process. A specific order can be implied, but is not the point either. Neither is the past, present, or future state, definition of the Cake. Though the individual parts, may, by distinct processes, be reformed exactly into the places and items they were before they were Cake - even if such is beyond achievement or understanding, that is irrelevant; as is the state, time, and method of doing so. Dividing it up does nothing to Cake.
Cake is an individual meaning, that does not apply to these things, and is only the thing it's meaning applies to. You can not use it for other things, and it cannot be transferred through meaning, as that is not Cake.
If there is individual for all, then you cannot say does not exist, just what is.
The difficulty with reading a lot of that, is that your brain adds words in, that appear missing, when they aren't, when the true understanding requires exactly what is there, anything else means it is not what it is, and the processes you go through to come to it are the wrong ones, forever-created pathways to understanding, that give incorrect meaning, and are used to make increasingly erroneous extrapolations from, both in thought, and in understanding other.
08-Jan-2017 22:16:29 - Last edited on 08-Jan-2017 22:56:06 by Yusou Bhoroi
One cannot say "X does not exist, it's actually X" or indeed say it is Y, when in actual fact, all that is needed is X, and the misunderstanding comes from trying to define it by other terms, or check it by other frames of reference. This is applied to distinct and indistinct bodies, occurrences, definable, and indefinable; each to it's own definition, and none to the same.
If further is required, then I will attempt to do so with examples, but that would further take it away from it's actual topic, and cloud the issue, leading to a misunderstanding of what is being said. It's an extremely precise system, but can be seen in basic forms, everywhere, yet is often misapplied, when trying to link ideas, or misapply methods to it.
[Note to others: This likely seems to be vague, or deliberately misleading or insubstantial, however, that is misinterpretation, due to misprocessing, largely due to only having access to one part of a conversation taking place across several platforms, therefore missing key components.]
08-Jan-2017 22:55:16 - Last edited on 08-Jan-2017 23:07:42 by Yusou Bhoroi
While the dedicated discussion thread for this issue, is no longer on the forums (was still in the Ninja section, in Autumn/Winter '14, and another was in the now removed New Game Content Suggestions section), I'll give a couple of threads where it's discussed, and then give an outline, here, of the merits of different options.
This thread, starting here, but continuing through the thread (mostly in pages 2-10).
This thread, throughout, but most discussion was in it's sister thread in the NGC-S section.
Overall, it's generally concluded that the system that balances simplicity with effectiveness most efficiently, is one that awards a set number of tokens per orb scored by the team as a whole, during the entire round - with this being the sole factor determining the number of tokens.
(However, systems that award more tokens per orb, after certain thresholds, are better, even if they require a little more work).
With a fixed number per orb, 4 seems to be the fairest number, if wishing to keep average times as similar to the current average as possible, for actual played games, at any level.
(With the threshold system, 1-6 over a range of 300, can achieve fairer effects, and would add more incentive to team play).
The working out for this, requires a breakdown of each alternative, which while useful if wishing to check other options, is just there for extra reading, so won't be contained in this post.
09-Jan-2017 00:10:16 - Last edited on 09-Jan-2017 01:50:16 by Yusou Bhoroi
Each area will be gone into, with scores given for how well they do/how much they do to encourage enjoyment of the content, ranging from
It's important to remember that while the system is inextricably impact-full upon the game, and is able to nearly single-handedly ruin a game, it isn't the essence of the gameplay itself, once the game is played disregarding it, and a game can be incredibly fun, and enjoyable, complex and challenging, relaxing and productive, yet people can be entirely prevented from finding this out, due to the reward-allocation system.
Over time, if a system produces negative experiences, for the majority of users, it can cause the death of a Minigame.
While no game will be everyone's dream, nor indeed liked by everybody, if the system prevents the very people who would potentially like it, from liking it, then those who would have been fans, had they been able to play it with a different system, will be amongst those who dislike the content.
Starting with the current system:
09-Jan-2017 02:06:09 - Last edited on 09-Jan-2017 04:05:44 by Yusou Bhoroi
Currently people can AFK after one person in their team scores one orb, and they will still recieve maximum tokens for that round, if the other team does nothing. This is the method used by the majority of users, including:
Boosters - who use alts to AFK on one team, while one person on the other team scores one orb, each altar, and the rest AFK. This gains more tokens than ANY form of legitimate play.
5050 - who split into 2 teams, with each team taking turns to have one person score one orb, and everyone else AFKing. This earns a higher average number of tokens, over time, than any form of competitive play.
Random AFKers - who know they will get the same, or greater reward for AFKing, than they would for playing, and thus AFK.
This always gains at least the minimal amount of tokens, but also ruins the game for all other players present (on both teams), by preventing play (by making orbs immovable), and thus leads to other players to give up trying to play (most often before they've even had a chance to experience playing, at all.. but can even gradually make long-term content-lovers give up, after persistent exposure to inability to play), resulting in them becoming AFKers, too, who in turn impact on even more games.
Being subjected to this, is one of the main 3 reasons that people turn to AFKing, whether that be 5050, or Boosting. The others are The System Rewarding it Above Play and Newcomer Persecution (with word of mouth/guide information of both, causing many who've never even been in a game, to immediately seek out AFK-boosting, before trying the content - often with immovable obstinacy over the issue of trying the content any other way).
Bots - While having much the same effect as random AFKers, they can do so in larger numbers, and are can thrive with this ability to gain without playing.
(Requires 2 clicks per 5mins)
09-Jan-2017 02:34:32 - Last edited on 09-Jan-2017 02:48:57 by Yusou Bhoroi
It does little to encourage people to work together, unless you count the incentive to create groups to manipulate the system for gain, without playing..
..which is actually a negative, if you consider such groups have no need to interact while in-game, no reason to use the content while there, and can impact negatively on people trying to play (both in terms of spoiling/preventing play directly, and in terms of leeching legitimate players away from playing + preventing newcomers from ever coming into contact with playing the game).
The effect of a content's system should really promote participation in it, not promote the prevention of it, while exploiting it.
It doesn't help that this system's only way of promoting playing-teamwork, is to give 92.6% of the reward to the team that scores 1 (note: just 1) more orb that the other team, with the other team getting pittance, no matter how well they played as a team, and no matter how well they performed.
Therefore it's in the best interest of people who have even the slightest degree of skill greater than the absolute newcomer, to band together and use that iota of skill to prevent newcomers from wining, further pushing them into AFKing or having negative experiences of the content.
What's more, the majority of the effort required, doesn't involve any skill in the game, at all.. it simply requires herding new players into one team, by hogging spots on the other team.
So the system manages to encourage non-play and the bullying of newcomers, as the only efficient forms of Teamwork. There's no credible incentive for using teamwork with the aim to perform well in the game, only to do enough to go one better than another team, and make sure that team is one that will not be able to beat you, even if you AFK.
The only Teamwork promoted is negative, and such that ensures the long-term death of the Minigame as played content.
With the system promoting widescale prevention of play, persecution of newcomers if play does happen to occur, and a profitable way to exploit the game without playing, the majority of newcomers never get to experience actual play.
Even if you were to wind back time, to a point when the system hadn't been in place for so long, that it (along with other things - some of which were, in themselves, a result of the situation caused by the system) had caused such decreased usage of the content, that it is nigh-impossible to find a game at all../if you feed a large amount of people into such a system:
The first obstacle, created by the system, that a newcomer must overcome, is the peer pressure to avoid, or AFK the content (from all sources: Players, Guides - including Wikis, JAGEX Streams/Comments, Content Treatment - lack of bug fixes, long periods without update, unrelated updates that strip the content of rewards, or uses from individual rewards, negative-AFK-promoting updates).
Going to AFK right from the get go, skimmed roughly 20% of players - it's impossible to gauge how many were put off from trying the content.. now it's practically 99%.
The second, is getting into a game where there are no AFKers, or bots to spoil the experience, or entirely prevent play.
This has varied, with the lowest being about 15%, in the very first days of Gop; being ~40% for the height of player activity, and being 100% at the peak of bot saturation (with all Worlds being filled with bots - by filled, I mean >10 bots attempting to join teams every minute, preventing anyone from joining a team unless they were fast).
The third is getting a game which hasn't been manipulated into being one-sided, by those who know even the tiniest thing about how Gop works.
This takes out nearly all the remaining players.. with most of the handful left being put off by the bad attitudes created by such a tense system.
09-Jan-2017 03:48:41 - Last edited on 09-Jan-2017 04:14:43 by Yusou Bhoroi
Those who don't, and struggle through a bit, are almost all persuaded to go and join AFK groups, boost by using alts, or just AFK in others' games, ruining and preventing gameplay & enjoyment for them.
Nowadays, it's rare for people to bother trying the content, even harder for them to find where it's played, and due to the Spotlight, it's almost guaranteed that they'll end up in an organised AFK game, from the get-go.
It's a miracle anyone new to the game was ever able to gain a positive experience out of trying it. The system is entirely responsible for this, either directly, or through it's knock-on effects.
09-Jan-2017 03:57:16 - Last edited on 09-Jan-2017 03:58:10 by Yusou Bhoroi
To an extent.. but a better question would be "Does the system encourage healthy competition?".. to which the answer would be a resounding: No.
As covered in previous areas, the only rewards from actually playing, come from being able to score just one orb more than the opposing team.
What compounds this, is the fact that if a score is tied for an altar both teams lose out.
-this was intended to be a quick-fix for the previous case, where both teams got half-win points, which was being exploited (albeit only for a few hours, on release), but actually had the effect of completely ensuring mismatched games, to avoid overall loss, and did nothing to discourage AFK games which prevent ties.
(Indeed, the prevelance of forced-losing on newcomers, greatly increased AFK's allure - not that it needs any increase, to become dominant, as we can see with other Minigames).
All this leads to people favouring, and being driven towards ensuring one-sided matches, at any cost, not competing with close-matched opponents. It encourages those who don't yet know the game, to compete in an unhealthy way, win all, or lose all, in a system where winning is prevented, and improving isn't rewarded even when it's permitted.. indeed, new players get slammed down, regardless of any improvements they make - so why bother.
(I've personally never been in such a situation, having been lucky enough to have come to the content as part of a pre-established group, that was all about playing together, and didn't care about the in-game rewards, so were immune to the effects of the system. However, I am well aware of what happens to newcomers, how it affects competition, and how it makes them feel, having kept a close eye on it, throughout Gop's history, and studied the system carefully, to trace the causes - not only alone, but with others who have shared their own experiences).
Close competition is discouraged by draws leading to everyone losing out.. yet an uneven match leads to one team losing out entirely.. there's always someone better than you, but you don't get rewarded for challenging yourself, and bullies get rewarded for picking on people many levels below them, in terms of skill.
This constant reward and positive reinforcement for such behaviour, can even make bullies out of people who weren't otherwise so, but just happen to use the content a lot (especially if they are, or ever have been for a time, using it for material gain).
The drive for total win, causes problems with those who taste it once, or become aware of it, but can't have it, leading to them criticising and having negative attitudes towards anyone they deem less skilled than them (even when that often includes those much more skilled than them). Overall, it creates a bad environment, whenever play actually happens, and even more so if there is competition.
This is not a problem endemic to competiton, and does not need to occur in a competitive environment, nor does it add to the enjoyment of one, for the majority of people (even competitive people).
As with any system of total, or near total win or loss, this is a problem with this system. The competition is not fair, it is not rewarded, and all the possible negative aspects of competition seem to be caused, without any of the positive ones.
In a small way, it can, but that is more by fluke, than design; the majority of the impact it has, has the opposite effect:
It prevents most players from playing at all.
It penalises those who do try playing.
Inexperienced people get next to no reward, and that tends not to increase as they improve, because they are still being targeted by people given the incentive to make them lose; they also find it difficult to experience games without disruption from AFKers, which only exist because the system encourages and rewards them.
The majority of ways to gain from the content (indeed, practically the only ways.. and certainly the only efficient ways), do not involve skill in participating in the content, merely in either manipulating the system for AFK gain, or manipulating new people into losing.
Given that the system makes it very unlikely anyone would try exploring the content, or gaining skill, and that if someone goes against that, and does try, they will be penalised, prevented, and bullied.. it completely fails on encouraging exploration.
As for rewarding skill - the system only rewards those who play against people who are no match for them, and therefore it gives the most reward to those who pick on people who are the furthest below them in skill.
The chances they will beat you are reduced to 0 (if you exclude computer freezes and dc's), and winning against them takes the least effort, so has the lowest effort:gain ratio.
It does not matter how little skill you have, as long as you pick on someone who is less skilled than you, you will gain the full reward, and they will gain nothing. Thus people are given the max reward, when they discover a way to bully newcomers, with no incentive to get better.
09-Jan-2017 05:20:08 - Last edited on 09-Jan-2017 21:18:27 by Yusou Bhoroi
The only real incentive, is to manipulate the system, or bully; any incentive there is to explore, or improve, is far outweighed by these other things (even before you factor in their advantage due to taking less effort).
In a mainstream setting? No.
Indeed, it does practically everything it can do, as a system, to prevent this; from making sure new and old players can't play together naturally, to giving people extra reward for doing things that disrupt and prevent play.
Those who play the content are forced away from the central focus areas of the content, and can only play in hidden away places. This leads to newer players having even less chance of ever experiencing play, because all that are left in the main areas, are AFKers, and those who reap rewards from bullying.
This causes a feedback loop, with fewer newcomers being able to play, so more turning to AFKing, which means even fewer get to play. This also strengthens the negative word of mouth about the content, which results in even fewer turning up to the content in the first place.
Any group of people who enjoy playing the content, slowly die out, as they have no access to the newcomers, so no chance of replacing people they lose (anyone they do manage to capture, outside of the normal system of things, will be increasingly far behind them in skill, and thus find it harder to relate, or get into the content, due to not having as many options for competition, and getting less reward - unless a lot of effort is gone to, to juggle the teams to make it fairer, which is difficult, even in the best of circumstances).
A decreasing population in playing groups causes less enjoyment to be had, because those who remain have fewer people to play with, find it harder to get to play, or have competition, and also get the negative psychological effects that stem from being in a dying community (especially an ignored one).
If there weren't multiple Worlds to hide away in, and off-site versions of Gop, the system would have completely killed off it's playing communities, many Years ago.
09-Jan-2017 21:44:25 - Last edited on 09-Jan-2017 21:45:47 by Yusou Bhoroi
The current system fails to deliver on any aspect required to encourage play and enjoyment of the content. Indeed, it has many negative effects that are so strong, that even when there is the potential for a slight positive effect to be caused by an aspect of it, this is prevented from occurring by other aspects (or parts of the same aspect), and the negatives would outweigh it, even if it weren't prevented.
This is not a system for a piece of content to have, if it is supposed to be enjoyed actively, or even have the possibility to be enjoyed. It would be a good system for a piece of AFKing content, but even then it would be fairer to simply disallow/prevent active use of the AFK content, rather than have the aspects of the system where if anyone who tries to use it actively, they get bullied.
A Minigame deserves, and actually requires having a system that allows, and encourages active exploration, play, and enjoyment of it. It is, after all, supposed to be content designed for those who enjoy such things; anyone who doesn't, has other pieces of content designed for their own playstyle and enjoyment.
Overall Score: 12/60.
It's hard to think of a worse system, for the long-term health of a Minigame. It may not have been clear at conception, but it has proved itself so, beyond shadow of a doubt, and therefore it's time for a change.
To see how other systems compare, we'll start with one which allocates tokens via orbs scored per person (considering both the option for it being the sole system, and that of it being an aditional one).
Does the System Require Participation in the Content, in Order to Gain While There?
Sole System: Yes.
As a sole system, his system ensures that reward can only be gained by being active in the content; however the activity undertaken, and the motives fueling the activity, are not without flaws (as will be covered in other sections), and it completely removes the option for those who don't wish to participate, which removes the ability for them to be a positive part of the content (though, at least, it removes the negatives of their actions).
As an additional one, it doesn't require participation at all, any more than currently. At best, it just gives people who are already defrauding the system, a way to do it a little faster, by putting in minimal effort, some of the time.
While it ensures activity in the content, this is not encouraged to be positive activity, and indeed there is incentive for negative activity.
While it could help encourage activity, it doesn't require it, and the best ways to gain will still involve manipulating the outcome, and periods of AFKing.
11-Jan-2017 00:01:42 - Last edited on 11-Jan-2017 00:02:41 by Yusou Bhoroi
Sole System: A little, but not inherently.
Additional: Very, very slightly.
When the Sole system, it does not encourage teams to work together to perform well, the only team encouragement relies on people working out the averages, and working together to manipulate the system.
The primary encouragement will be for individuals to be the one who scores the most orbs, which is an incompatible goal with teamwork. It will encourage a lack of teamwork in order for personal gain, at best.. and will directly reward those who disrupt and sabotage their own team mates, in order to score orbs they have brought close to the altar.
As an additional system, the same problems will occur, as will the ones from the current system. The strongest team-ecouraging influences will be to manipulate for gain, not to work well together at the content; in addition will be the encouragement to monopolise orbs, and work for solo gain, at the expense of others in the team.
Very little exists of the incentive for teamwork, and the majority of the incentive is directly against teamwork.
Given the current system's already overwhelming lack of teamwork incentive in playing, what little positive influence adding this new part will give, will be even more overwhelmingly negated, than it manages to do to itself.
Sole System: No.
On it's own, this system would cause many problems for newcomers, as they would be gaining even less than they currently do, and with just as much persecution from more experienced players, with them still being directly rewarded for preventing new players from gaining reward.
Any attempts to get more points, would bring them directly into conflict with players more experienced than them, who will be capable of taking advantage of them for their own gain.
As an additional system, it just further exacerbates existing problems for newcomers, and adds yet more to their troubles, making it yet more unlikely that they will ever experience fun while playing.
Rivals the current system, for creating as bad an experience as possible.
Practically the only way to make a bad situation worse.
Sole System: No.
Additional: Even less so.
The only way these systems encourage competition, is between members of the same team. This is not conducive to any long-term competition, or like for the content (indeed, it would destroy practically any chance of people wishing to stay on past getting what they came for).
If an addition to the current system, this would not inspire anything more than passing competition between soloers, who would still gain less overall by competing, than by simply manipulating the system to gain AFK.
While both encourage competition between team mates, this is a negative, rather than a positive. Competition between teams not encouraged outside solo play, as people will always gain fewer points in a team, if not deliberately boosting one person.
Sole System: Ineffectively.
As a sole system, it may encourage people to become skilled in playing, but by far the biggest incentive will be to become skilled at stealing team-mates' orbs. Thus bullying and team-trolling is rewarded.
The encouragement will be to ensure you play on a team with newcomers, who will be easier to steal from, or solo (more experienced players may bring more orbs in faster, but stealing from them will be harder, as they'll become better at preventing it).
Given that newcomers will be the most persecuted, and least rewarded, and with the incentive being to prevent them from learning, the system directly rewards the first few to become skilled, while preventing any subsequent people from becoming so - therefore permanently negating it's only positive effect.
As an addition, it yet again, adds difficulty to exploring the game, and with the existing incentives to not explore the game, it ends up being just another prevention method.
Sole System: Partially.
Stand alone, the system will allow those who enjoy playing, to do so solo.. but won't encourage people to that, with the majority being prevented from even finding out if they do or not (because more experienced players will keep them down), and the best reward coming from bulling and stealing from team-mates (thus few will break out into being able to enjoy just playing - unless they enjoy bullying).
It does get rid of the ability for people to AFK to gain while preventing play.. but it transfers the incentive entirely over to another form of preventing play.
It will still lead to a dead community, by content self-annihilation.
All in all, the mainplay, and long-term effects of such a system will be the same as the current one, for the majority of the playerbase.
Adding the system will be ineffective in removing the current stoppages to enjoying play, and will still cut off new players from being able to enjoy playing the content.
Either method would solve none of the major problems, as any good aspects are negated either by others, or by the long-term effects of the same aspects.
The only positive is that as a stand alone system it would eliminate non-participation as being an option.. but given that the gameplay is prevented from being fun, and that it cuts out the vast majority from ever liking the content, it's a decisively bad route.
Unless the whole Minigame were converted to a Solo-only, under the stand-alone version of the system, with all team-content removed, along with a large chunk of the possible community-forming potential, and potential for a large quantity of even those who like active content and Minigames, to like it.
Otherwise it's not possible for this method to help the content, at all.
As an additional system, all positives are made impossible by the current system's effects, and only it's negatives are allowed to contribute; so no chance for it to improve the state of affairs the content is currently in.
Whichever way it's done, this system would require entirely new systems to be coded, and does not rely on already displayed data.
Sole System: 21/60
11-Jan-2017 01:13:07 - Last edited on 11-Jan-2017 01:22:25 by Yusou Bhoroi
A system that rewards individual effort, would seem fair at first, but would not work for Gop, as it would cause internal conflict within teams, create enmity, and reward negative behaviours.
Further more: any way to make this system would require a lot more work, as it does not rely on data already displayed - necessitating something that is more prone to glitches, both in itself, and caused to the rest of the content.
This would be a set of problems facing any system that didn't base itself on already displayed data - ruling out quite a few other options.
What is required, is a system that has many positives, doesn't impact too negatively upon anyone, and can be based around something that's already displayed as data.
All these considerations lead to the proposed idea:
A system awarding tokens based on team scores, with a set ratio for tokens to orbs.
This system ticks off for being non-complicated, and thus hopefully easy to implement, but how does it stand up as a system for gameplay?
11-Jan-2017 01:32:15 - Last edited on 11-Jan-2017 01:35:32 by Yusou Bhoroi
30-Dec-2017 14:27:06 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 09:12:23 by Yusou Bhoroi
These things are the minimum needed to be done, if the update is going to have the possibility to be positive for many Minigames - if they aren't done, then there's no point even pretending it's done to attempt to help them.
While the Minigaming Hub, focussing all players, from every World, in one place, may be a good idea, they should not all be playing in the one place.
It is fine, and good, to gather folks in one place to group up for Minigames, but once they are grouped, they should be able to choose (and that is very important) where they play.
Most importantly, it will also allow veteran players to make the teams more balanced for newcomers (a fair proportion of experienced players are very concerned with giving newcomers the best possible experience of the content, so allowing them to, is important).
06-Jan-2018 04:22:10 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 04:42:48 by Yusou Bhoroi
This is a very important issue for Minigames, in general, regardless of whether they get grouped or not.. but grouping will cause the problems it makes to be utterly unavoidable, no matter how much effort players put in to compensate for it.
It is unfair that players are already forced to put in many times more effort to even organise a playing game, than they have to to just turn up and AFK. For some Minigames they have to essentially hide away from any labled servers, or Spotlights, in order to play legitimately - this cuts them off from newcomers, and means they find it harder to meet up or know of eachother's existance, in the first place.
What's more, when they do finally get to playing, they often get fewer rewards while actively playing, than they would do if they were AFKing - this is completely unacceptable, as it undermines the use of the content.(and this isn't even counting the rampant, AFK-able Boosting, that goes on).
The fact that they've refused to ever change many Minigames' reward-currency allocation-systems to reward playing over AFKing, is responsible for the fact that most footfall is not from people playing it - the very thing they think justifies not changing it.
(if you painted over a roadsign every day, and then said people were ignoring the sign (which they only do because they can't see it when it's painted over), so there's no reason not to paint over it, then would you find your arguments justifiable?)
06-Jan-2018 04:25:57 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 04:42:12 by Yusou Bhoroi
Tension between different levels of experience will still be present, but will be reduced. The solution to problems will be more along the lines of helping newer players to learn the Minigames (and they will have a direct incentive to learn more, instead of a constant pressure to AFK and gain even more points than players, rather than play and get even less than other players), rather than to manipulate them into losing, and farming off them.
Games will be possible, they will be more fun, and there will be more incentive to have balanced teams (which benefits the most people).
Anyone wishing to AFK still, will have 2 options:
-- Don't go to the content, and purchase any purchasable rewards from those who are actively playing.
-- Pay some of the best players to allow you to leech off their playing - this has a benefit for all players:
- Those wishing to AFK for rewards can still do so, and gain fast rewards.
- While doing so, they are not disrupting or preventing games (or enjoyment) for anyone.
- High-end players get a reward (the gp), that is sustainable, and doesn't require extra reward development time.
- Most of the high-end players likely to take advantage of this, are the more mercenary ones, who don't tend to appreciate playing games with new people, this will keep them separate from such new people, so neither group causes problems for the other.
Is it ideal? No -but it's indescribably better than the current situation where AFKing and disrupting/preveinting play or enjoyment of the content is directly rewarded and encouraged, which means no new person coming to the content can possibly like it, nor older players enjoy it.
06-Jan-2018 04:26:09 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 09:16:35 by Yusou Bhoroi
There should be a good mixture of tradable and non-tradable rewards (even if the only non-tradable ones are the pets and proficiency-based-achievement unlocks), so that folks who like playing can do so for a sustained period, and those who don't like playing, don't have the incentive to occupy the content (or find ways to do so which are disruptive to players).
*ones that are involved in the rest of the game - like:
- Parts that can be combined for high-end Invention Materials.
- Things that can be added to boost the stats of high-end equipment.
- Useful convenience items, or upgrades to them (we know how much you like these, by how much they get pilfered from Minigame suggestion threads - can't claim coincidence, as same wording has sometimes been used in description, including gramatical errors).
- Bonus XP.
- Extensions to things like Vis Wax cap.
- D&D tokens.
- Abilities, or slightly buffed versions of them.
- Others that are Achievement-locked, behind graded (starting low, and ending very high - as you do with Bosses). These can be as simple as recolours of existing rewards, with one colour for each tier of achievement.
- Pets and Titles never seem to go unpopular, either.
06-Jan-2018 05:04:09 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 05:04:34 by Yusou Bhoroi
This is largely group-content, and it's well known that the advantages for playing in a group have to be substantially greater than those for playing solo, in order for people to even bother attempting it.
If you make rewards link to (degree and proficiency - even if based on team) participation, then gaining reward from Minigames in an efficient way would require every bit as much skill as high-end Bossing does, so it could safely give comparative rewards.
It has the advantage that it can be played at lower levels of proficiency, or in a more relaxed way, and still obtain many of the rewards (any that aren't locked behind the higher-end achievements), but over a much longer timeframe - so there's incentive for all types of players to play it, without it being imbalanced.
A combination of the two things is best, but the xp-rate is very important, as the time taken to get rewards needs to be long enough to encourage and allow people to explore the content properly (which takes a lot longer than most people assume before trying - and I'm not referring to anything more than a passable familiarity with the basics; it is no different to Bossing, in this regard, but even more skill-based, and less influenced by equipment).
If you make the rewards take long enough to obtain for it to be reasonable, it makes them extremely inefficient to obtain - any benefits they give to gameplay are vastly outweighed by the time gaining no xp, while Minigaming.
Therefore giving decent xp while playing, allows properly priced rewards.
06-Jan-2018 05:04:23 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 05:23:41 by Yusou Bhoroi
Don't make it so people are penalised for spending time waiting around for a game, or feel they can't have fun and hang out with other Mingamers, while there.
It should feel more like the Minigamers version of Prif, or Menaphos, than a hidden away bunker, where you're gathering all Minigamers in some effort to better eradicate them once and for all.
To this end, and given it'll have to be sufficiently big, an separate (probably on a seperate server), making sure there's G.E. access there, is also a priority - perhaps even somewhere to hand in Dailies.
The access either needs to be very central, or given to each Minigame's gathering point (each one should have a bank, at least), so as not to make it better to hang round some Minigames, than others.
-- Having an alternative version of Daily Challenges, that are Minigame-only, would help, too..
Skilling and Combat have their's, which means not only are Minigames unfairly left out, but Minigmers often spend all their time doing the non-Minigame things, and end up with no time for Minigames.
Relieving that pressure, either by making so many daily things that everyone understands they can't do all of them, every day.. or by making it so you only get to do one of the three (Skilling/Reaper/Minigaming) on any one day (but making sure they are all equally rewarding), would be a good idea, too.
Currently Minigames are left out, here, too.. and where they do have any Ahievements, they are a complete joke, and don't reflect the quality, nor difficulty of the content.
There are numerous ways to easily obtain ideas for suitable achievements (and they could be tied in with the profficiency-unlocked rewards and recolours).
06-Jan-2018 05:17:31 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 05:40:25 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Highscores that are actually indicitive of proficiency and deadication to playing the content (not just how long you've AFK'd/bug abused/boosted there).
Both permanent, and Seasonal, are possible (and easily linkable to proficiency) for most Minigames.
- Support for Player-Run Tournaments - doesn't have to be major, but mentions of them in official media, and providing a JMod who can hold prize-money that's donated by players, so that participants know it's real, and will be given out fairly, would help a great deal.
Having JMod participation in them, JMod v JMod tournaments, or JMod-run tournaments would be a step further, but have an even greater positive effect - it might also mean a few of the Dev Mods were more familiar with content they don't really seem to have a clue about.
- Having it so that if a Minigame is played in the last hour, it imparts certain boosts to spawn rates/resource respawning rates, or some such related thing. (this would be more effective without the Hub, to be honnest, as it could be one on a per-World basis, and encourage individual Worlds to value having Minigaming communities on them, even if they don't Minigame themselves.
06-Jan-2018 05:26:42 - Last edited on 06-Jan-2018 05:47:21 by Yusou Bhoroi
Posts below are intended for checking length and such.
09-Jan-2018 22:31:03 - Last edited on 14-Aug-2018 22:35:49 by Yusou Bhoroi
Solution #1: Reward points based on activity/success. Not unlike The Great Orb Project's activity meter. This could mean that certain minigames reward Thaler at a faster rate than others but that is hardly a problem. How would activity be determined? By how many points you gain?
I wholeheartedly agree that activity should be determined by how many points you gain, however, I feel it imperative to point out that that is the exact opposite effect to the current Activity Meter in The Great Orb Project, which measures activity based not on score, but on certain unrelated actions, that can be done while AFKing, and will prevent others from playing, while that person is doing it.
(i.e: someone clicking an orb, then AFKing, which makes it very difficult to get the orb - or, indeed, impossible, if they repel it to some spots; it wastes much time, and imbalances a game, what's more it will result in the meter kicking the AFKer, if you take the orb they are hogging, thus you risk everyone getting kicked out due to the AFKer getting kicked. This means that people who want to play, either have to put up with extremely disrupted, often imbalanced, or impossible games, or risk getting kicked; it also means that people wanting to AFK (why are they in a Minigame, if they want to AFK?) either don't mind being kicked, because they're AFK, anyway, or they start deliberately sabbing, so they can AFK, often flaming any attempting players, as they do it.
As a result of this, and the point system not rewarding on orbs scored, most people turn up wanting to AFK, and out of those who don't, almost all get such a terrible experience that they give up, and turn to AFKing, too.. which makes it even harder for any left trying to play.)
So, in conclusion: very unlike he Great Orb Project's activity meter. I support the idea, though. : p
14-Aug-2018 22:36:00 - Last edited on 15-Aug-2018 04:14:31 by Yusou Bhoroi
o More RELEVANT rewards
o DESIRABLE rewards specific to EACH minigame.
o DEGRADABLE and CONSUMABLE rewards that encourage players to return.
o Widely ACCESSSIBLE rewards between all players of any level, status or time commitment.
o TRADEABLE rewards to attract players more intent on making money.
Agreed, though there should also be some non-tradables, and some achievement-based unlocks, that have increasingly difficult/challenging requirements to unlock (even if these are restricted to cosmetics, or recolours of existing rewards - a different colour for each tier of difficulty), so that players can show off their skill (important for community building, and enticing people to try things out), as bossing has such things, and Minigames can be every bit as challenging as the toughest of bosses.
An interface to that helps players generate teams across servers anywhere in the game world without sitting in a minigame lobby hoping someone comes along. The interface can be opened from the adventures tab beneath minigames (could be used for bossing and raids too?)
Here, you can find other players interested in playing specific mini-games, bosses or raids. Select the status of either 'Interested', 'Ready' or 'Recruiting'. This will be available for all currently using the interface to see. Additionally you will be able to see others who have indicated their 'interest' or 'readiness' to play. From these names you can either invite individual players to join your team or "auto-form" a team. Or you can wait for someone to invite you. Filtering options could even be added to weed out lower levels and amateurs.
Again this would work across servers from anywhere in the game world.
The Grouping system was meant to achieve this, but it doesn't work (at least not for the majority of Minigame usage), for the simple reasons:
1) It doesn't allow you choice.
- You can't choose from a list of existing groups, and groups can't specify whether they are for play, AFK, new-player-friendly, or private. This is the key thing that makes it impossible for existing Minigame groups to use, without, and makes it unwieldy, and hostile to random players trying it out; it would be far better just to have a directory of existing Friends' Chats, even a basic one.
2) It's not easy to find, and you're not prompted to look for it, or use it, anywhere (not surprising, given how bad a system it is, for most things.. the majority of usage appears to be for the free teleports to places).
All it did, was create a period after release, where groups were in flux, due to trying to accommodate it, and cut off from new players, thus increased their atrophy rates (tipping some over into being unsustainable).
For those worried that this would be too OP perhaps it could have a daily XP cap before rewarding reduced xp.
Frankly, there's not much worry that they're going to make them OP (though they should make it so that playing very well, gets very good xp, where that's applicable, as playing Minigame well, is a lot harder than skilling well, in almost all circumstances).
If you look at GOP, they could increase the xp from it by up to 130x the current xp given (so 260x the base xp rate), before it would rival (note: rival, not be better than - and this is only for people reasonably skilled at the game.. it'd need to be much higher for most players, likely more than double 130) the best skilling methods.
It's no wonder people don't think it's viable..
Give people at least a reason to not have every moment spent there feel like they're wasting valuable time that they could spend on progressing in the rest of the game (something that is hammered into players at virtually every opportunity).
Then, maybe, people may feel permitted to stick around when they enjoy the content; rewards would help that, and the xp rate could be lower than a 13,000% increase, to facilitate adding some great rewards - but the xp should be increased substantially, regardless.
15-Aug-2018 01:31:14 - Last edited on 15-Aug-2018 04:18:48 by Yusou Bhoroi
Custom games would not have access to the drop mechanic due to boosting.
Agreed for some Minigames, but I don't think that's the best course of action to take with all of them, and I have some workarounds.
Tying in with your droptable idea, that I'll address here as well:
Basically, a droptable idea, with drops being available to anyone with the levels, is a reasonable start, but it doesn't prevent someone from getting access to some items, while AFKing (it makes it harder, but it doesn't make it impossible, and thus it can easily be overcome by fielding more accounts at once, and putting in minimal effort).
A way to combat this, would be to have several drop tables, each requiring a certain number of points to be gained in a match/round, in order to access (each drop table could have 2 unlock levels - one that unlocks access to it for that round, and a much higher level, than unlocks it permanently; that is just an option, it may be best to only have the temporary access option, unless the targets really are challenging - perhaps you could unlock the ability to access it at a slightly lower score).
The basic idea is to ensure that effort must be put in, to access more desirable rewards, and a lot of effort and skill is required for access to the top tier of rewards, while AFKing won't get you any rewards.
Like I said, some minigames are fine with just the base system you suggested, but for some, it wouldn't have the desired effect, without further safeguards (what's more, the safeguards encourage further exploration of the content, beyond minimal-input grinding, in order to get rewards slowly (after all, rng will mean that some get lucky with that, which would be enough to encourage it happening).
Not all Miningames can utilise this, without encouraging boosting - but ones where scoring more game points is something that requires skill, and effort (actually playing the game), then it's best to give communities as many options as possible.
15-Aug-2018 01:50:51 - Last edited on 15-Aug-2018 04:22:02 by Yusou Bhoroi
They should definitely have the top tier weapons/armour at least require a component from Minigames (and not just any Minigame, each weapon/armour should have a different Miningame, but the components should be tradable - what's more, if a Minigame provides for one weapon in a combat style [e.g: wand/orb], it should provide for the other variant [staff], so that the market won't skew to discourage people buying it, which would happen if getting one type from a Minigame was easier than getting the other type from another Miningame), or at least make it so that a consumable is required for repairing weapons (not as an alternative, but actually required), and with similar precautions taken to make sure each Minigame has its own, and they can't be circumvented*.
*That ensures that each Minigame is being played by someone, and people who like it have a reason to play it, instead of some getting left out.
The idea of 10% damage reduction from certain monsters is good, but they should scale future monsters to be near-impossible to do without having these things, so that there is actually a reason to have them, rather than it being more of a cost-effort-reward balance, where people can get away without ever getting them. If they are tradable, then it isn't forcing people to play things they don't want to (though there should be at least one required item, that is non-tradable, for each Minigame, so that people at least try them out, before deciding they don't like them - many change their perceptions, if they try).
15-Aug-2018 01:58:37 - Last edited on 15-Aug-2018 02:12:25 by Yusou Bhoroi
The Warpriest to F2P is good, though I think maybe the T75 version (upgrade, once you own a set, from FOG) should be gained from GWD, so as not to undermine that. You'd have to get the set from FOG, in order to make use of the upgrade.
(Hourglass has typo "worm items" )
The off-hand skilling items could include one that auto-disassembles items made whilst wearing.
A few of the items, like the Golden Feather, already exist in-game, as perks, or other items; while it can sometimes be ok to have more than one way to do something, devaluing other content, directly, isn't always the best way.
Original message details are unavailable.
Quite a few typos in this post (looks like auto-correct was misinterpreting you).
That last Invention scroll... o:
Actually, a lot of them are called that.. O-o
It would be interesting if they had powerful items, with niche uses (combat included), that only existed in a limited number - <5 in the game, per item, that could only be obtained by being the highest scorer in a Miningame (holding the World Record).
They would be much prized items, and could have several governing mechanics (not all of these are necessarily intended for the same items):
The top one has slightly better stats than the other 4.
Possession of the items is re-evaluated every day (so the top scorer during the last 24 hours gets one).
If an account is inactive for a Month, the item passes to the next person on the list.
The item can be sold, but will degrade to dust after 1-12 hours use, after sale, and must be re-obtained.
An account can only earn them once (though you can buy from a players who have earned, more than once)
15-Aug-2018 02:17:28 - Last edited on 15-Aug-2018 03:05:21 by Yusou Bhoroi
You can already combine Spirit gems (you can either combine them, up to 1k charges, or forge them, to upgrade their tier, at a ratio).
A lot of Ability upgrades could be more powerful, if each upgraded use, used up a charge - and you get new charges from the Minigame.
The same thing could be used for spells like Shield Dome - consumable charges, that increase their uses.
More trade-offs can allow powerful boosts, and there are plenty of things they could utilise for these, such as items that are powerful, but you can only use one actionbar, while wielding (or have some slots made unusable, on each bar).
15-Aug-2018 03:21:26 - Last edited on 15-Aug-2018 03:28:15 by Yusou Bhoroi
- A quick way to get to rc altars. Wicked hood teles, nature tablet, law tablet, etc. Clay, Talisman at poh. Promote actual runecrafting.
I don't agree with them undermining the current Gop rewards any more (indeed, I don't think the Robes, or Tabs should be available from Span, or Thaler shops).
They should also make the tabs teleport you to the same place the hood does (which is closer to the altars).
Yusou Bhoroi said:
So, in conclusion: very unlike he Great Orb Project's activity meter. I support the idea, though. : p
Ill concede the point, lol. I suppose I was highlighting the concept and not the execution. And perhaps there isnt a perfect activity meter but itll be a start. Even better would be to give them a reason to want to play. Perhaps with the way I suggested implementing the drop mechanic, this would solve itself? You have to attain a high enough score to be eligible for a drop and surplus points further increases your chances. (Insert my boosting solutions).
Maybe it would be necessary to make Thaler award based on score? Eh, but no. I think the drop mechanic would be incentive enough. Yes? No? Maybe?
Understandable, and yes the concept of requiring activity to gain things is a good one - I very much support that! (It is in your original wording, I was just highlighting the unfortunate use of that one as an example, as it could lead to misinterpretation of the intent, given that one is ineffective in practice, unlike the proposals you make for future things).
It would be nice if the drop mechanic was enough - it should make some impact, it's just that as long as Thaler is around (in its current form), then people will be using it to trim (a large section of people), and they'll be able to do that while AFKing, likely not minding whether they get other rewards, due to Trimming being their goal.
Unless trimming it made significantly faster to gain while not-afking, than when afking (it would likely need to be in the region of 5x as fast with normal effort, than without effort), then a large enough chunk of people will afk for it, large enough that they impact on gameplay, and possible enjoyment, thus causing those who were borderline to afk also.. which then leads to an escalation of afking, again.
..and this is where the issue lies.. JAGEX will never increase the effort/time it takes to get that part of Trim. The best solution would be to increase the cost of Profound (and other thaler items), but make it so that thaler could be gained faster through participation; however, they veer strongly away from that concept, and would only go for making it even easier to get.
In that scenario, there would have to be rewards that would take a substantial amount of time to obtain, from individual Minigames (each only obtainable from one Minigame), to make up for any deficit in time spent in them.
It's the same basic argument against making rewards cheaper - you're reducing the amount of time people spend being rewarded in the content, to below that which is required for them to grasp how the game really works, what it's really about, and to fully form an opinion over whether they like it or not; this is especially so, when it's not guaranteed that they'll even experience playing, in most of their games (currently, even for Minigames which have their own, unique rewards, that can't be bought through thaler, most will obtain all of them, and pass out of the content before they've ever experienced actually using it, so they either have no idea whether they like it, or they dislike it due to the wasted/boring AFK-time; they have no reason to ever return, and will spread bad word about it).
Yusou Bhoroi said:
Snipped for lenght - can click the thing to see in full.
I think you hit the nail on the head. You cant choose from a list of existing groups. It makes the assumption that you already have a group of interested players assembled and serves no other purpose than to teleport them to the location when everyone readies up. Kinda defeats the whole purpose of FINDING a team doesnt it?
...specify whether they are for play, AFK, new-player-friendly, or private. I like the way you put that. Also, I didnt include private groups/games Ill adjust accordingly.
...and youre not prompted to look for it, or use it, anywhere... Thats a very good point. When should the player be prompted to use it? Upon entering the Minigame Hub? When in a waiting area? Definitely there should be some sort of prompt but I wonder where? Under what circumstances? Thoughts?
Paragraph 1: Indeed, they never seem to think things through, even when it's explained to them at every stage of development - the only conclusion is that it was never intended to do what they said the update was intended to do.
Paragraph 3: It really depends on what other updates they do, and whether they fix it.. (not really a good idea to encourage people to use it as it is.. it'll just cause more problems.
I'd suggest that there's at least a mention of it in the early path-system, that they're currently using for new accounts, and that there's a more detailed tutorial of it, the first time a player interacts with Minigame content; after that, a brief reminder hint/popup, the first time they interact with each individual Minigame - that way people are unlikely to forget it, and more likely to make use of it (of course, this is provisional on their changing it to be a useful system, as there's no point with it in the current version).
Yusou Bhoroi said:
There seems to be a certain amount of hysteria around OP content but nobody seem to complain when it comes out lol. As a result minigames are often lackluster for fear of being OP. Not to downplay power creep, but it is also because of power creep that minigame rewards/xp are obsolete. Once upon a time Stealing Creation was some of the best xp in the game. Now look at it. Its only efficient when using the Fast SC chat.
My thinking is, minigames are supposed to be accessible to player of all levels and of diverse statuses.
1. What if XP was scaled by level? Thus it can be rewarding for all levels and statuses.
2. Implement a weekly cap. Make them reward very competiti[/quote]
There's no harm in Minigames being the fastest xp in the game, if played well - indeed, they'd need to be that, when played well, in order for it to be worthwhile playing them when first learning.. It doesn't have to be by a lot, but even a tiny bit is good enough to encourage long-term activity, and a decent enough level of xp for introductory play, is imperative.
Scaling with level is a good idea, for most, and would be ideal (whether it would add too much work, is a possible problem.. though it really shouldn't, given the amount it is used in other content).
Two rates of xp, one that is very good, and one that is lower, but still viable (as good as the best of the more AFK methods of skilling, but not as good as the more active skilling methods), would be good - with there being a cap on how much you can earn at the faster rate, each week. That would entice some use, while allowing the xp rate to be very attractive, yet not make Minigames become deserted, and useless, once you reach your cap.
Yusou Bhoroi said:
They should definitely have top tier weapons/armour at least require a component from minigames.
I actually have a few things cooking in this regard. High end tiers are pretty empty at the moment and have a lot of room for added diversity.
Theyre pretty good if I dont say so myself.
Armour/weapon patches and additions would be a great route to take. Like a very rare patch that makes Darklight as good as it was pre-nerf.
Ripper claws could use one. They just barely missed the mark to being useful. Drygores are better even when your opponent is below 50% health. A patch that makes them better than Drygores when your opponent is beneath 50% health would make them a niche and very valuable switch.
Agreed, there should be more mutually-supportive content, to ensure power creep doesn't make dead content.
I hope that whenever they start launching the next tier (95?), that they have such a Minigame-inclusive idea, to incorperate, from the start, so that Minigame play is required (by someone), in order for such equipment to be made.
16-Aug-2018 04:20:08 - Last edited on 16-Aug-2018 04:27:07 by Yusou Bhoroi
Yusou Bhoroi said:
The idea of 10% damage reduction from certain monsters is good, but they should scale future monsters to be near-impossible to do without having these things, so that there is actually a reason to have them, rather than it being more of a cost-effort-reward balance, where people can get away without ever getting them. If they are tradable, then it isn't forcing people to play things they don't want to (though there should be at least one required item, that is non-tradable, for each Minigame, so that people at least try them out, before deciding they don't like them...
Thats an interesting idea. So effectively were locking certain bosses behind and item (at least to do it effectively). Giving them incentive the play the game and further said boss/monster will remain relatively lucrative because of that wall. If Im understanding you correctly,
Indeed! It could even be done for certain monsters, like future Elite Slayer Monsters, or the next thing similar to an Elite Dungeon, so that they may be possible, if you are a top player, and/or can afford a lot of food, but would be very difficult, and they'd be much easier/much more viable to do for profit, if you have the item/upgrade.
They could even make it so that certain things require a consumable item (like the Barrows totems, Key to the Crossing, and Mimic Tokens), in order to attempt, and those items are bought from Minigames, or given out every time you get a certain point/score value, or are a chance when doing so, at certain Minigames (or with each Minigame providing for a different boss/monster); such items being tradeable, and the unlock being useful (giving access to desirable items).
16-Aug-2018 04:24:29 - Last edited on 16-Aug-2018 04:37:15 by Yusou Bhoroi
Yusou Bhoroi said:
There really need to be more rune sinks, before they can add more rune-saving items, as many runes struggle to maintain prices, or are well below their shop-value, we should be careful not to undermine other content (like skilling for GP), when updating Miningames.
Im actually okay with runes being cheap. Perhaps we just disagree on a very basic level on this but I dont enjoy worrying about runes and cost. Id like to use ancients but I almost never do also because of cost.
Ill just have to agree to disagree.
Probably so. :p
I'm not concerned too much with things like blood/soul, but the elemental ones (other than fire), are currently well below shop buying prices, which is a big indicator that they are coming into the game much faster than they are going out, even though no one is making them, due to them being very poor money. (fire ones have been botted, on a huge scale, for Years - an entirely seperate issue, that I wish they'd deal with, not least because it prevents F2P from accessing a potential money maker).
If Minigames were decent money makers, then I'd be more ok with Skilling not being so good (just think there should be more non-bossing related methods for people to make money, as currently the game is largely skewed towards bossing - I'd rather Minigames than non-intensive Skilling, in any case, as Minigaming takes effort, as long as the reward systems are changed to be linked to effort).
Yusou Bhoroi said:
The Warpriest to F2P is good, though I think maybe the T75 version (upgrade, once you own a set, from FOG) should be gained from GWD, so as not to undermine that. You'd have to get the set from FOG, in order to make use of the upgrade.
Id argue that theres other reasons to go to GWD but none to go to FOG and therefore wouldnt undermine it. It got along just fine before warpriest was added as a drop. I see your point though. But thats just me. Im not against it or for it.
Personally, I'd agree with you - GWD has enough without Warpriest. However, taking things away from content, is a bad precedent to set/enforce, as it has been very damaging to Minigames, with them getting stripped of what little they have left. I also doubt they'd be as willing to go for the idea, if it entirely cut out GWD from the picture (even though it would actually be equal treatment, if they stripped every boss of unique rewards, and added them to Minigames, given they've done that/the equivalent, the other way round).
Yusou Bhoroi said:
It would be interesting if they had powerful items, with niche uses (combat included), that only existed in a limited number - <5 in the game, per item, that could only be obtained by being the highest scorer in a Miningame (holding the World Record).
I dont think this would be popular among players as they wouldnt appreciate an unfair advantage given to just a few players that likely many of them will never achieve. Maybe something to test the waters? See players reactions? I feel like it would be either very successful or cause an uproar.
Well, tbh, they'd be more niche items, for those going for the highest enrages, or fastest times, and are wanting the very best gear, to do so - not required for the average player, even for high-end stuff.
As such, they'd be worth a lot of money, to those who can afford the most, and bring back some cross-content support, which currently only goes one way (with Minigamers requiring things from Bossing, if they want to have the best gear for Minigaming, or if they want to do stuff in the wider game). Given they'd be so limited, and degrade rapidly, they'd be worth a fair bit (if they give a good enough boost, and top-enrages required such boosts), and yet still work as attractions, and prestige items.
As long as it's done correctly, it shouldn't make people feel too left out, if they never have the items - how many people go for speed times, or the highest enrages? How much do they splash out on equipment, during their attempts? How much does the average player complain about not doing such things?
I don't think it'd do any real harm, and it gives Minigames the chance at prestigious items, and reverence of the skill involved, as well as a general perception of the content being worthwhile to actually try at.
I know I'd never have a chance of obtaining any, but would still love to see this sort of thing. :
Also, I apologize for the rewards sections. Theyre a mess I know. There are dozens of old ones I need to weed out and some embarrassing typos as youve noticed.
No need! I was only pointing out any that sprang out, as I know it's often hard to spot them (or keep track of them, once spotted), while making/maintaining a thread, so was only intending to help with that. : )
Thanks for the discourse Yusou! Youve given me a lot to think about and even more to revise. Ugh! Ill try and tackle those changes later.
Very glad (and relieved) that you were able to read through all my input and see it as still being supportive/positive (I often mess up, and come across as being negative towards things I'm actually supporting, so it was nice to see that was avoided, here, as I very much support your thread!).
Remove the ability to manipulate the opposing team's orbs, turning it into PvO (can have that as the default option, with the ability to do old-style games for tournaments, if wish).
Have a series of drop tables, with each drop table only being rolled on if you reach a set threshold in total score (sum of the team's score on each altar), e.g: A drop table with only basic rewards, for scores <175, one with slightly better rewards, for scores >175<200, better for 200-225, even better for 225-250, 250-275, 275-300, and so on, up to 500 (sum of current duo maxes is 482 - and there's little chance of anything higher than that being achieved in one round, even in a team of 5).
Rewards are not guaranteed from accessing a drop-table, but you get more rolls on it, the more orbs you score (the number of orbs could equal the number of rolls, meaning you get a lot of rolls on the lower tables, when you get a high score, as well as some rolls on the higher tables).
The team that wins an altar (gets the highest out of the 2 teams' scores), gets an extra 1% added to the number of rolls they have awarded at the end.
The team that wins the game, gets and extra 5% rolls added.
(draws mean each team gets 1/2 of the extra rolls: 0.5%, per altar-draw, and 2.5% for a round-draw).
~ Teleport Tabs
~ RC Xp Books/BXP
~ Unstable Essence
~ Massive Pouch
~ Enchanted Notepaper.
~ Wicked Robe Piece
~ Runic staves
~ Rcing staves
~ Extreme RCing potion
~ Abyssal Charms (or pouches for the RCing Familiars)
~ Some sort of tempory boost for RC xp, while crafting at altars (probably best done as a buff to xp for 1 crafting action, after breaking an RC Teleport Tab).
~ Acess tokens to a place with an exclusive Slayer monster (or could be a source for access tokens for a new boss).
~ Master Runecrafting Outfit pieces.
~ Rune-collector (convenience item, similar to bonecrusher, or gold-accumulator but for runes).
| - Upgrade to work with Catalytic Runes.
| - Upgrade to work with Talismans.
| - Upgrade to work with noted Talismans.
~ Higher tier of Pouch/ability to combine pouches.
~ RuneSphere reset tokens.
~ Sign Of Life reset tokens.
~ Unstable Air Rune.
~ An additional usage for Vis Wax.
~ Livid Plant (Rune-related).
~ New Mage Abilities/upgrades to existing ones (could have a balance mechanic, whereby they use up runes, in exchange for the extra damage).
~ Acess to more support spells/upgrades for support spells.
~ Unlock the ability for Abyssal creatures to drop Impious ashes, instead of regular ashes.
| - Upgrade to Accursed ashes.
~ Unlock noted talisman drops (at least for Abyssal creatures). This may require a talisman sink (use of Talismans, as one of the ingredients in making the new armours?), or reduction in the number of/removal of Talismans given by other sources.
~ Skilling and Combat Sigils (after all, there's the equipment in the Guild, already - behind Korvak).
16-Oct-2018 01:11:04 - Last edited on 03-Nov-2018 18:50:12 by Yusou Bhoroi
(and/or: ) Degradable patches, that can be added to existing Mage set pieces, in order to upgrade their stats, slightly. (done as patches, so that future tier releases don't cause them to become obsolete).
~ At least one of the components, if not the full item, for any new Mage wep/arm added above the current top tier (socring high in Gop, is the same as doing high enrage kills, on the top bosses, in terms of the level of skill required, so there's no reason why it shouldn't have access to such things, once the PvP element has been reduced as a reward determinator :- winning will get you a few extra rolls, but it won't allow you to access a higher drop table).
~ RCing robes (standard)
~ Recolours for Master RC robes, with each table having a different colour assigned to it.
~ Orb Pets, which are unlocked after a set number of achievements are obtained (scores in different team set-ups, like Solo, Duo, Trio), and each orb being for achieving them on that colour.
~ Orb pets of the other 2 colours (purple and violet - currently seen in the Mage Training Arena), for certain targets in different play-modes (one of the most popular is Ploord - where you cannot enter the circle created by the ring of stones round the altar, cannot run, and cannot repell).
~ Some sort of strange item, or trading-sequence item.
~ Overrides for the Attractor and Repeller wands.
~ A Barrier Generator, for outside Gop.
(the last two could aslo be non-cosmetics, in that if they had function, such as pulling things towards you, pushing them away, and creating an impassible barrier, they could all be useful, and fun).
There are quite a few other reward ideas, but most of the older ones suggested, have ended up getting poached for use in other content.
16-Oct-2018 01:11:56 - Last edited on 03-Nov-2018 18:54:29 by Yusou Bhoroi
The number of Altars accessible (currently any that reqiure quests, are not playable, it'd be nice if they could be).
The PvP element (the most enduring attraction for long-term Goppers, is the PvO element, and that should be enough to entertain, and challenge people, while keeping it fair. The small bonus for winning altars/rounds, is a nice way to keep PvP, without making it something that makes too much difference. The majority of player rivalry/interaction, comes from beating others' top scores in different playmodes, and in overtaking others on tables of lifetime average scores).
The recent changes to the Earth Altar (anything that wasn't purely graphical - the object placements have caused issues with trapping orbs, and changing gameplay).
The amount of xp awarded while playing :- Currently, you get a 2x multiplier for Rcing xp, during the game, but this is miniscule. Even reasonably experienced players will be hard pressed to get more than 3k/hr, in competitive games (this could be multiplied by 40 times, without even beating the most AFK RCing methods, and could be multiplied >120 times, without coming close to the best XP methods, which require a *lot* less effort, and skill, in order to carry out).
The current reward system can go, as can the Spotlight/Thaler access, as all they do is directly reward AFKing, which is disruptive to the extent that it can entirely prevent any play, in GOP).
You can make it possible to 1v1, and even 1v0, with the proposed revision - 1v1 is fine, you just score lower (but decent soloers can easily outscore unskilled teams, so it's not too big a barrier, other than for the top rewards). 1v0 is also fine, as it allows access, but you'll miss out on getting the win-bonusses, and will score lower than in a team.
Things that should stay the same:
The wand mechanics, altar maps, spawn locations, number of orbs, and anything not related to PvP - just don't add anything new to the mix, as it works really well as PvO, without any extras in those things.
(Graphical changes are fine, as long as no new objects are added, and any graphical changes to existing objects don't change their mechanics - the mini-posts on Mind are a good example of something that it may be easy to miss, yet have a massive impact on gameplay, and are integral to that altar; they block orbs in one diagonal axis, but not in the other - and they are all in different directional orientations).
That's basically it, as that's the core game, from a PvO perspective.
The Drop-tables will balance fairly well for F2P, too, given that most of the F2P items will be in the lower tables, and it'll be impossible to even access the higher tables in F2P, due to having fewer altars.
The bonus for winning altars/rounds may need to be reduced a little, as the full 13% for winning all, may lead to some manipulation (though it wouldn't give *much* of an advantage, given you have to be skilled to score high, and access the top tables, and you will get *some* of that bonus by playing competitively, so it isn't a 13% difference between win all, and lose some); it's more of a small bonus for playing in a larger group, rather than solo.
What's more, the people who lose, can still get good access to rewards, when they play well, so there will be less incentive for fixed games, in the first place (even before you take into acount the minimal gain for doing so, and the fact you have to perform just as well, anyway, in order to access top droptables).
Although not entirely necessary, there could be a mechanic whereby anyone who dc's, will get access to the drop-tables unlocked by the score at the point of their dc' (up to the last completed altar), with the number of rolls also determined by that score.
It's difficult to balance being fair to dc'ers, while preventing people from rq'ing on teams, without it costing them anything, but I think that this could be a reasonable solution, if any measures are required.
Solo (1 player on a team) - 58 26 44 23 53 52 | 35 57
Duo (2 players on a team) - 78 36 64 34 75 72 | 45 78
Scores only count if:
No one other than the single player, for Solo, or pair of players, for Duo, touches the orbs.
If being strict, then scores also don't count unless the person/pair can achieve them both when playing green, and when playing yellow, as there are differences between thier sizes, and spawn patterns.
No more than 3 orbs are in play (it doesn't matter if you only use 3, if there are more than 3 present, as it gives you more options, so does not count as valid).
Return to post xp-multiplier post.
18-Oct-2018 18:07:41 - Last edited on 30-Nov-2018 00:16:44 by Yusou Bhoroi
Minigames certainly need more achievements (would be better if they counted towards a separate Minigame cape - basic, and master versions).
For The Great Orb Project, I'd suggest the following score targets:
Given the way others have suggested achievements, I've seperated these out into individual ones, where they were previously in sets
If it is too much work, at least at the current time, to differentiate between Solo-play, Duo-play, and Group-play, then it would be best to go for the Group-play sets. Given how much a part of the community it is, it would be so much better if there could be the Solo and Duo sets, as well.
These scores are intended for altars with 3 orbs, occasionally there will be a glitch with Mind [and very rarely, for Earth], where more than 3 orbs will be in circulation [up to 7] - it is quite a common occurance in large groups, so if this glitch cannot be detected, or patched, it may be best to opt for the alternative targets, which will be included in square bracketing
Ideally, it would include targets for other playstyles (at least walk, Legacy-Gop, and Ploord), as there are so many different game-modes, with their own highscores kept by the communities, but that's almost certainly asking for too much.
Going with the suggested targets would give people something to really aim for, and a reason to explore the game in depth, and will likely encounter those playstyles during that time.
These are fun challenges, ranging from basic skill, which requires only the first fundamental concepts to be understood, all the way up to the top tier, which is harder than any current Bossing feats.
Some of the targets may not be evenly spaced, compared to others in their set, or other altars - that is because they are based on observation of play, which often leads to spikes in score increase for some altars, when acquiring certain skills
High Water scores are slightly rarer.).
18-Oct-2018 18:14:13 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:49:45 by Yusou Bhoroi
Breeze Artist (Tier 1, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 55 orbs, with your team, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 60 orbs, with your team, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 68 orbs, with your team, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 74 orbs, with your team, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 80 orbs, with your team, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 1, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 20 orbs, with your team, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 25 orbs, with your team, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, with your team, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 34 orbs, with your team, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 38 orbs, with your team, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 1, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, with your team, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 48 orbs, with your team, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 54 orbs, with your team, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 60 orbs, with your team, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 64 orbs, with your team, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
18-Oct-2018 18:14:20 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 18:47:43 by Yusou Bhoroi
Mud Machine (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 24 orbs, with your team, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 28 orbs, with your team, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 32 orbs, with your team, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 36 orbs, with your team, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnitian (Tier 1, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 50 orbs, with your team, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnitian (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 58 orbs, with your team, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnitian (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 62 orbs, with your team, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnitian (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 68 orbs, with your team, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnitian (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 75 orbs, with your team, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 1, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 48 orbs, with your team, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 54 orbs, with your team, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 60 orbs, with your team, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 66 orbs, with your team, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 72 orbs, with your team, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
18-Oct-2018 18:14:26 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:00:01 by Yusou Bhoroi
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 28 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 32 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 45 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Nature-Lover (Tier 1, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 55 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Nature-Lover (Tier 2, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 60 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Nature-Lover (Tier 3, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 66 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Nature-Lover (Tier 4, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 72 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Nature-Lover (Tier 5, Group) - Achieve a score of at least 80 orbs, with your team, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Gop Noviciate - Achieve all Tier 1 (Group) Achievements.
Gop Wizard - Achieve all Tier 2 (Group) Achievements.
Gop-tologist - Achieve all Tier 3 (Group) Achievements.
Gop Pro - Achieve all Tier 4 (Group) Achievements.
Gop-tacular! - Achieve all Tier 5 (Group) Achievements.
18-Oct-2018 18:14:32 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:40:17 by Yusou Bhoroi
Breeze Artist (Tier 1, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 50 orbs, with your partner, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 55 orbs, with your partner, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 60 orbs, with your partner, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 4, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 66 orbs, with your partner, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 74 orbs, with your partner, on the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 1, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 18 orbs, with your partner, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 20 orbs, with your partner, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 25 orbs, with your partner, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 4, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 28 orbs, with your partner, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controller (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 32 orbs, with your partner, on the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 1, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 35 orbs, with your partner, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, with your partner, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 48 orbs, with your partner, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 4, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 54 orbs, with your partner, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 60 orbs, with your partner, on the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
18-Oct-2018 18:14:37 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:30:40 by Yusou Bhoroi
Mud Machine (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 20 orbs, with your partner, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 25 orbs, with your partner, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 4, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 28 orbs, with your partner, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, with your partner, on the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 1, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 45 orbs, with your partner, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 50 orbs, with your partner, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 58 orbs, with your partner, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 4,Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 62 orbs, with your partner, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 68 orbs, with your partner, on the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 1, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 43 orbs, with your partner, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 48 orbs, with your partner, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 53 orbs, with your partner, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 4, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 57 orbs, with your partner, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 62 orbs, with your partner, on the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
18-Oct-2018 19:13:07 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:29:36 by Yusou Bhoroi
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 22 orbs, with your partner, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 28 orbs, with your partner, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 4, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 32 orbs, with your partner, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, with your partner, on the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 1, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 50 orbs, with your partner, on the Nuture Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 2, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 55 orbs, with your partner, on the Nuture Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 3, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 60 orbs, with your partner, on the Nuture Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 4, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 66 orbs, with your partner, on the Nuture Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 5, Duo) - Achieve a score of at least 74 orbs, with your partner, on the Nuture Altar, during a GOP game.
Coord Learner (Pull!) - Achieve all Tier 1 (Duo) Achievements.
Coord Cogniscent - Achieve all Tier 2 (Duo) Achievements.
Coorder - Achieve all Tier 3 (Duo) Achievements.
Coord Partner - Achieve all Tier 4 (Duo) Achievements.
Chief Coordinator - Achieve all Tier 5 (Duo) Achievements.
18-Oct-2018 19:13:11 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:39:58 by Yusou Bhoroi
Breeze Artist (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, on your own, at the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 2, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 35 orbs, on your own, at the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 3, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, on your own, at the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 4, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 45 orbs, on your own, at the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Breeze Artist (Tier 5, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 50 orbs, on your own, at the Air Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controler (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 12 orbs, on your own, at the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controler (Tier 2, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 14 orbs, on your own, at the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controler (Tier 3, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 17 orbs, on your own, at the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controler (Tier 4, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 19 orbs, on your own, at the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Mind Controler (Tier 5, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 22 orbs, on your own, at the Mind Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 22 orbs, on your own, at the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 2, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 27 orbs, on your own, at the Water Altar, during a GOP game.4
Aquatic Operator (Tier 3, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, on your own, at the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 4, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 36 orbs, on your own, at the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
Aquatic Operator (Tier 5, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, on your own, at the Water Altar, during a GOP game.
18-Oct-2018 19:13:15 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:48:15 by Yusou Bhoroi
Mud Machine (Tier 2, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 13 orbs, on your own, at the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 3, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 16 orbs, on your own, at the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 4, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 18 orbs, on your own, at the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Mud Machine (Tier 5, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 21 orbs, on your own, at the Earth Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, on your own, at the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 35 orbs, on your own, at the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, on your own, at the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 45 orbs, on your own, at the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Pyrotechnician (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 50 orbs, on your own, at the Fire Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 25 orbs, on your own, at the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 2, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, on your own, at the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 3, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 35 orbs, on your own, at the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 4, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, on your own, at the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
Heartfelt-Hero (Tier 5, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 45 orbs, on your own, at the Body Altar, during a GOP game.
18-Oct-2018 19:13:19 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 19:54:01 by Yusou Bhoroi
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 2, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 18 orbs, on your own, at the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 3, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 24 orbs, on your own, at the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 4, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, on your own, at the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Chaotic Cowboy (Tier 5, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 35 orbs, on your own, at the Chaos Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 1, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 30 orbs, on your own, at the Nature Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 2, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 35 orbs, on your own, at the Nature Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 3, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 40 orbs, on your own, at the Nature Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 4, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 45 orbs, on your own, at the Nature Altar, during a GOP game.
Nascent Naturalist (Tier 5, Solo) - Achieve a score of at least 50 orbs, on your own, at the Nature Altar, during a GOP game.
Gop Nub - Complete all Tier 1 (Solo) Achievements.
Orbfinder - Complete all Tier 2 (Solo) Achievements.
Gopsicle - Complete all Tier 3 (Solo) Achievements.
Made of Orbs - Complete all Tier 4 (Solo) Achievements.
The Orb - Complete all Tier 5 (Solo) Achievements.
Orbmancer-General - Complete all Tier 5 (Group+Duo+Solo) Achievements.
18-Oct-2018 19:13:23 - Last edited on 18-Oct-2018 20:02:51 by Yusou Bhoroi
03-Nov-2018 18:45:33 - Last edited on 03-Nov-2018 18:46:08 by Yusou Bhoroi
Good to see you're still about : )
I hope things are ok, with you, and that you've had a good couple of Years!
(I keep seeing folk with "groudon" in their RSNs, and thinking it might be you, but hasn't been, so far )
You're welcome to play with us, any time you like, if you wish to Gop - though you're equally welcome, if just wanting to talk. : )
(There's a New-folk Server, one for the old W61 crowd, and a couple of private ones - though very rare that they do a game on RS, these days).
Given that you have to actually put in a lot of effort to even get the 3k and the most AFK method (Span) is >40x that, it makes little sense. Soul Runecrafting is also far less intensive, and yet gives up to 200x as much...
This means that any time spent there is counted as wasted, regardless of the rewards you get (because they don't even begin to make a dent on the degree to which it's inefficient - and can all be obtained far more easily, from other sources), which needs to change.
The content is good, and the essence is given out based on score, mostly eliminating the ability to boost it*#, so it would only take an update to the multiplier, to make the content more viable (which was confirmed to be a "5 minute, tea-break job", by Mod Crow, back in 2010, when people were first asking for it).
*# If you de-link the score comparison between teams, to the essence given, then it would be completely unboostable - even without doing that, it still requires the equivalent of high-level-enrage-Telos skill, in order to score high, so even if you're 'boosting' your essence, by only having one team play, they can't get much xp, without also actively playing.
29-Nov-2018 23:25:30 - Last edited on 29-Nov-2018 23:26:16 by Yusou Bhoroi
You could do any of the following:
1) Change the multiplier into a 50x one (which would make it worse than Span, for the majority of players, but still reasonable xp).
2) Change the essence allocation to be "player's team's score / 2, rounded up to nearest whole number" (because it's impossible to pick up and craft the ess, if there's too many), and the multiplier to x50; which would be slightly fairer, and work out roughly the same.
3) Make essence given in-GoP be stackable (only able to be used inside GoP), and allocated on a 1 per every orb the team scores basis; then change the multiplier to 25x.
(Given the level of skill required to achieve scores, and the fact it is necessary to be more active to achieve them, than in /any other RC content/ - or, indeed, any content outside high-enr bosses, the next few proposals are intended to be more generous, in order to reflect that. If you disagree about the skill level required, then feel free to have the best PvM testers try it out [JMod, or Player], and I would be very surprised if they manage to get any decent scores*@)
4) Change the multiplier to a 100x one, which would put the mean experience rate onto a par with that of the low-input Soul RCing (F2P could be given the lower, 50x multiplier).
5) Change the essence allocation to be "player's team's score / 2, rounded up to nearest whole number" (because it's impossible to pick up and craft the ess, if there's too many), and the multiplier to x100 (x50 in F2P); which would be slightly fairer, and work out roughly the same
6) Make essence given in-GoP be stackable (only able to be used inside GoP), and allocated on a 1 per every orb the team scores basis; then change the multiplier to 50x (25x in F2P).
29-Nov-2018 23:26:50 - Last edited on 30-Nov-2018 00:15:39 by Yusou Bhoroi
This means it starts off being roughly the same as Span, but gradually increases to be in line with Soul crafting, at 99, in P2P.
*Expected average of a team of 4 that at least knows the very basics - roughly what a group of new players will achieve, if they are left to learn for themselves, during the time it takes them to get all the rewards - they should average that score, at the end of that period (provided they play all games).
/Most people would score less than this, during their time at Gop/; someone who studies hard, and has help, or stays longer than getting all the rewards, could average more (it's possible to average a /lot/ more, but only with a greater degree of skill, akin to pushing for high-enrage at bosses - most will never do this, so it's not useful to use as a base rate, and given the effort put in, it won't be /unduely/ rewarding.).
**This assumes that, on average, a team is winning as much as it is losing.
F2P can do just under 4 games an hour, with it usually being a fair bit under 4, due to turnaround time (usually averages about 3, in reality).
P2P can do 3, if quick at turnaround.
Using the figures of the average team, upon completion of the content (so almost all users will be below this), when going full-out, all being of that skill level, and not being defended against (so even they will likely not get this much), the xp rates per hour, will be:
30-Nov-2018 00:12:52 - Last edited on 30-Nov-2018 00:14:37 by Yusou Bhoroi