What we have.(long)

What we have.(long):
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]

Posted by Grallon on October 19, 2000 at 04:36:41:

In Reply to: Why are there no skilled players left? (elitist rant) posted by The Arcane(VIP) on October 19, 2000 at 03:53:34:

I am not saying that this is THE reason. I am not sure that this is even a REASON instead of an EFFECT. But this is what I have noticed.

You are note the only or first person to notice this trend. People have been noticing this for quite some time now. And I am willing to bet that the Imms have been aware of it, and have been working against it in whatever way they can.

But, one way in which it seems they are trying to work against it is counter productive. It perpetuates the viscious circle of the decline.

And this is, as rooq said, their reticence to appoint cabal leaders. I understand the logic behind wanting to wait for, or appoint, only the most skilled player as a leader, in an effort to encourage a cabal back to the level of skill most people beleive existed a few years ago....

BUT. Lack of leadership means the people who are TRYING to become the new ranks of the skilled have their chars wither, and die. It forces them into an Apathy. The apathy is necessary to preserve their desire to play, for if they continue to get emotionally and intellectually involved, and spited, Burnout is inevitable. So of COURSE you have players begining to turn an apathetic ear to the pleasures of "skill" or "success".

Many cabals, especially Empire and Arbiters, suffer from this. In the past 2 years, there have been many times when there have been people who DO log in regularly, who are NOT morons, who can spout the Dogma of a cabal convincingly, and are NOT appointed leadership positions. It seems to me that this is because the imms are "waiting for something better".

I say screw that. If they log on regularly, are not a Moron, and can spout the expected stuff, unless someone better is available NOW. Appoint him. Period. Get the cabal's leaders to show up. Get them to induct. Get them to Enforce their people showing up. When someone more qualified comes along, replace him. Having a non-moron, non-elite leader is a better way to wait for the elite leader than having no leader at all.

On the subject of cabals, but a different facet. Is the balance.

I remember those "good times" you allude to. Back in Isty's day, and before. And I beleive that one reason (or effect of, not sure of the causal nature) for this down-turn in skill is the now total lack of any balance in population.

Back then, I remember that it was NOT rare at any pk to type who pk, and find at least a few of every cabal, and more than a small number of independants. Exceptions of course made for the Imm-council, and the Diku-empire trends.

But for a long time now, it has been all or nothing for every, and yes I mean every, cabal. The "ups and downs of the pendulum" seem to be swinging much much much much MUCH wider than before.

I have been paying attention to logs, and made logs, of who pk commands for quite some time now. And it just seems to me that, while not unknown back then, it is far more common for one cabal to have 7-10 in a given pk at a given time, and for opposing cabals to have rarely as many as 2. This goes for a while, and then the population shifts to another cabal.

Now, I know that friends like to play with each other, but I put forward that this trend of "all-or-nothing" that has become increasingly pronounced, started getting out of hand with the popularization of irc and icq and the forum. As players get to know each other, and converse and keep in touch more out of the game, more and more will start to flock to similar roles at the same time.

This is not limited to the ooc cheating and perma-grouping. But includes making chars that fit entirely within the rules, and act within the rules, but have roles that are complimentary. It's just human nature to want to play WITH your friends instead of AGAINST your friends.

And the Longer CF exists, the more of it's players will become friends ooc. And the only cure to this is to chance the average tendancies of Human Nature. I am not saying everyone who knows someone ic will do this (hell, clemmy and ithan and I have faught each others chars more than played with), but I am saying that to deny that it is a general, and altogether natural trend, is to deny reality.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:	> I am not saying that this is THE reason. I am not sure that this is even a REASON instead of an EFFECT. But this is what I have noticed. > You are note the only or first person to notice this trend. People have been noticing this for quite some time now. And I am willing to bet that the Imms have been aware of it, and have been working against it in whatever way they can. > But, one way in which it seems they are trying to work against it is counter productive. It perpetuates the viscious circle of the decline. > And this is, as rooq said, their reticence to appoint cabal leaders. I understand the logic behind wanting to wait for, or appoint, only the most skilled player as a leader, in an effort to encourage a cabal back to the level of skill most people beleive existed a few years ago.... > BUT. Lack of leadership means the people who are TRYING to become the new ranks of the skilled have their chars wither, and die. It forces them into an Apathy. The apathy is necessary to preserve their desire to play, for if they continue to get emotionally and intellectually involved, and spited, Burnout is inevitable. So of COURSE you have players begining to turn an apathetic ear to the pleasures of "skill" or "success". > Many cabals, especially Empire and Arbiters, suffer from this. In the past 2 years, there have been many times when there have been people who DO log in regularly, who are NOT morons, who can spout the Dogma of a cabal convincingly, and are NOT appointed leadership positions. It seems to me that this is because the imms are "waiting for something better". > I say screw that. If they log on regularly, are not a Moron, and can spout the expected stuff, unless someone better is available NOW. Appoint him. Period. Get the cabal's leaders to show up. Get them to induct. Get them to Enforce their people showing up. When someone more qualified comes along, replace him. Having a non-moron, non-elite leader is a better way to wait for the elite leader than having no leader at all. > On the subject of cabals, but a different facet. Is the balance. > I remember those "good times" you allude to. Back in Isty's day, and before. And I beleive that one reason (or effect of, not sure of the causal nature) for this down-turn in skill is the now total lack of any balance in population. > Back then, I remember that it was NOT rare at any pk to type who pk, and find at least a few of every cabal, and more than a small number of independants. Exceptions of course made for the Imm-council, and the Diku-empire trends. > But for a long time now, it has been all or nothing for every, and yes I mean every, cabal. The "ups and downs of the pendulum" seem to be swinging much much much much MUCH wider than before. > I have been paying attention to logs, and made logs, of who pk commands for quite some time now. And it just seems to me that, while not unknown back then, it is far more common for one cabal to have 7-10 in a given pk at a given time, and for opposing cabals to have rarely as many as 2. This goes for a while, and then the population shifts to another cabal. > Now, I know that friends like to play with each other, but I put forward that this trend of "all-or-nothing" that has become increasingly pronounced, started getting out of hand with the popularization of irc and icq and the forum. As players get to know each other, and converse and keep in touch more out of the game, more and more will start to flock to similar roles at the same time. > This is not limited to the ooc cheating and perma-grouping. But includes making chars that fit entirely within the rules, and act within the rules, but have roles that are complimentary. It's just human nature to want to play WITH your friends instead of AGAINST your friends. > And the Longer CF exists, the more of it's players will become friends ooc. And the only cure to this is to chance the average tendancies of Human Nature. I am not saying everyone who knows someone ic will do this (hell, clemmy and ithan and I have faught each others chars more than played with), but I am saying that to deny that it is a general, and altogether natural trend, is to deny reality.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]