State of the realm meetings. For direct feeback

I was talking with people in the discord from multiple realms
The idea of a "Council" type meeting. Where devs/GM's could get a "State of the realms" discussion/feedback with players from different aspects of the game. Solo/GvG/Smallman/BG RvR.

Whether the GM's offer a topic thats these people give feedback on or more general situations/changes.

Rotating the players who play most or prefer certain playstyles is the key though. So theres plenty of input/perspectives before changes are implemented or suggested.
Much like the voting system but this gives a chance for civil direct disscussion which, personally, I am not aware of anything like that being in place currently.

As long as it was civil or they rotated who they talked to then to take it one step further got feedback from multiple sources and then made a test build (if that were possible) to adjust changes could really go a long way to improving the server.

Thu 5 Nov 2020 10:03 PM by Gildar

Not a bad idea.

But how to choose people to talk with GM ?

Thu 5 Nov 2020 10:09 PM by SinfulByNature

Gildar wrote: ↑
Thu 5 Nov 2020 10:03 PM
Not a bad idea.

But how to choose people to talk with GM ?

People that perhaps run BG's or Known solo'ers for that aspect. GvG groups have logs they could ask. Etc.

Fri 6 Nov 2020 6:45 AM by Sepplord

In general such a suggestion boils down to the assumption based implication that players know better what's good for the server than the staff, for which there is no evidence

Playing a lot, even successfully doesn't neccesarily make you a good feedback creator, can even backfire because these people are biased (unintentionally)
And on the topic of bias, playing a ton doesn't necessarily mean you are interested in a balanced server, intentional bias is also an issue

Fri 6 Nov 2020 9:25 AM by easytoremember

Everything you're wanting this council to do already occurs in the form of the forum you're posting on

Fri 6 Nov 2020 10:38 AM by

gruenesschaf

easytoremember wrote: ↑
Fri 6 Nov 2020 9:25 AM
Everything you're wanting this council to do already occurs in the form of the forum you're posting on

Theoretically yes yet there are a couple problems:
1) "unsolicited" suggestions usually gain no traction in the player base and hence not much attention from us either
2) If it gets traction, anything that requires even the slightest bit of thought to understand the ramifications, specifically why it doesn't really have as much impact as it might seem at first, will be drowned out by knee jerk reactions.
3) Lot's of bad faith single realm thinking / arguing, an example would be the recent weird necro interactions exists hence we need weird necro interactions as well

In general we'd be open to have some kind of council, the main problem here is though how people get onto it. The next thing that should be clear from the start is that it would be an advisory role only and we should probably mostly expect to get reports of what is seen as actual problems, not necessarily suggestions. And then to see if certain solutions would fix it.

Just to give a likely flawed example: GT in rams can't be fixed, necro has gt placement advantage, there are lots of earth wizards, gtaes are oppressive in keep and especially tower fights, those would be the problems (the question obviously is how much merit each of them has) and suggestions for each have been made, however, a general solution if these really are things that are seen as problems and not just multiple instances of "I want to be solo in keep fights but can't be solo without heals because gtae damage" would for example be to remove /groundassist. Another very related example would be if you add the "problem" that full tanks are not invited to groups in keep fights, combined with the prevalence of gtae damage and hence rupt a solution could be to give full tanks a group "aura" where their party members aren't rupted by gtaes in keeps when within a certain range of that grouped full tank.
In those cases the most important thing to establish is are these problems actual problems. Only then does it really make sense to try to find a solution that can then be properly aimed at solving those problems.

Fri 6 Nov 2020 3:02 PM by DJ2000

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Fri 6 Nov 2020 10:38 AM
In those cases the most important thing to establish is are these problems actual problems. Only then does it really make sense to try to find a solution that can then be properly aimed at solving those problems.

That is a tough one.
An advisor Role lacks the "power" to determine, if something is legit or not, or how "urgent" it is.
If the GMs already considered a Problem to be legit, then the "Council" is superfluous at best.
At that point its basically just a passive Group of people with a heavily reduced Feedback range, by the limited nature of these Members.
Can it work out? Maybe. I highly doubt it.
To have one or some people say "yes or no" to a change, that doesn't even matter, additionally to the Staff, won't help much.

On the other hand, there is no way this could even remotely work in any other way.

Obviously, there have been talks about stuff like this among the Staff. as the Staff never says/suggests something on a whim, unless its an obvious joke. So i highly doubt that i said anything new.

The sheer fact that "we" have to create something like this in a project that is supposed to be about "Fun, nostalgia and Community" is kind of sad, really.
But there is no point to be sentimental at this point anymore and make some half-baked decisions clouded by "dreams", now that things have come to this, might as well make this as good as it can possibly can be, with all the seriousness of an open conflict as anyone can muster.

- anonymus
- interchangeable
- non-maintainable
- non-elected
- non-influence by other members
just to name some criteria.