Jump to content

Holyman

Patron Saint of the Emulator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    193

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    1180.00 USD 

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Holyman

  8. Posted

    I miss the Game... :(

     

    I do occasionally logon to see if my rustic broadband connection is tolerable... But even with just a single 'toon logged on, the latency on my ADSL makes gating and docking a precarious affair.

     

    Still hopeful that a General Election, a Brexit and a de-monopolization of the UK's only ADSL provider may improve things in the not-too-distant future... But it'll be a while before I get anything like the 200Mbps Metropolitan Cable connection I used to have in the Glory Days.

     

    Do however feel fairly confident that I'll have 1Gbps fibre-to-the-home before the issues around the Raid Rotation are resolved though.

     

    :D

  9. Posted

    17 minutes ago, efialtis said:

     

    It also intensifies further this nagging feeling on the back of my head that "most insanely coveted Dragons Dread Mail Elite" is the driving force behind those more vocal about doing away with the raid rotation.

     

    I wonder if making some/all of the four time-spawned raid's loot tradeable would i) mitigate the situation and ii) be more of an easy change for the Dev's than changing the spawn timers or making the raids trigger-activated?

     

    :unsure:

     

    (BTW: Hi Efi!)

    • Upvote 1

  10. Posted

    Haven't played in almost exactly 12 months... (Since moving from London out to the country and a *VERY* poor broadband connection...)

     

    When I *WAS* playing (rather more actively!), I dipped my toes into the Raid Rotation Discussion as a somewhat objective arbiter... And even proposed a few alternatives to the existing Raid Rotation System.

     

    It's a quiet day at the office today, and having exhausted my usual lunchtime websites, I thought I'd check in with Net-7 and see how things were going... And guess what? Discussions on the Raid Rotation still seem to be the order of the day..!

     

    I wasn't intending to post... But you know how it goes... Old habits die hard... So here are my thoughts, based on what I've just read in this thread, and in the other current Raid Rotation thread:

     

    It is the nature of human beings that once a competitive advantage has been gained, it is *VERY* rare for such an advantage to be voluntarily surrendered.

     

    The members of the “Big 3” Guilds gained/earned a big advantage several years ago, with regards access to the top raids in the Game.

     

    Whilst we might read the posts of representatives of those “Big 3”, and either silently or vocally criticise their insistence and justifications for maintaining their advantage… Are any of us honestly answering the question: would we behave any differently if *WE* held the advantage?

     

    ^^That isn’t meant to be a Magic Bullet to silence criticism… It’s just an observation to bear in mind, however we might honestly answer the question, whilst we participate in these discussions.

     

    Another observation-based thought:

     

    Kyp, the Grand Poobah, has stated in fairly unequivocal terms, his attitude towards the Raid Rotation System. In particular, he has emphasised that no player “owns” any particular raid.

     

    Quite rightly – and I suspect, based on painful past experience – Kyp (and the rest of the Dev Team) keeps himself out of Player Politics.

     

    Could he use his omnipotence to issue a ruling..? Undoubtedly.

     

    Would such a ruling from On High bring a full and final end to players expressing dissatisfaction with access to raids: undoubtedly *NOT*.

     

    On the issue of converting the time-spawned raids to triggered raids:

     

    I think we all recognise this would be an ideal situation

    I think we all understand that there would be… “x” amount of Development activity required to (re-)code, test, implement and balance this…

    But do any of us think that if it was a simple and straightforward thing for the (volunteer) Development Team to carry out… They wouldn’t already have done it?

     

    So… What popped into my head and compelled me to post, was this:

     

    Discussions around the Raid Rotation Agreement tend to be fairly binary. Either the Raid Rotation System remains as it is; or it is scrapped altogether.

     

    Actually, that wasn’t what occurred to me just now… That occurred to me a couple of years ago, when I was last contributing to the (on-going) Raid Rotation discussion… And I presented two or three alternatives that sat between the As Is-:-Nothing polarity. But I think I probably overthought those suggestions… And consequently over-designed them… (It happens…)

     

    No, what just popped into my head was what I think is a cleaner, simpler alternative, based on what I was reading.

     

    Assuming the Raid Rotation hasn’t changed in the year that I’ve been away, then it still consists of a four-weekly rolling schedule, with each of the “Big 3” getting dedicated access to a particular raid, for one week out of four. And the “Public” get the spare week.

     

    Given the change (/decline) in Server and Guild populations since that Raid Rotation was originally devised, how about the following:

     

    A two-week schedule.

     

    Week 1: all time-spawned raids are open to the Public; with “Big 3” Guild members discouraged, but not necessarily forbidden from participation.

     

    Week 2: all time-spawned raids are… “Prioritised” for the “Big 3”. And the “Big 3” can formulate a new Raid Rotation agreement amongst themselves, to figure out how they want to share the different raids amongst themselves, during their “On” week.

     

    I use the term “Prioritised” advisedly, because as Kyp has emphasised, no player (or Guild) “owns” any Raid. But as with the existing Raid Rotation agreement, any accord will succeed or fail on consensus participation. Respect for the “prioritisation” of “Big 3” Guild Week, will be reciprocated by the “Big 3” respecting the “discouraging” of their participating (or at least, initiating) time-spawned Raids during Public Week.

     

    Moving to a two-weekly turnaround in the Rotation means that “Public” players don’t have to wait a whole month, before getting another chance at the specific raid they are interested in.

     

    Giving all “Big 3” Guilds dedicated access to all four (is it still four..?) time-spawned Raids, means that they can still operate their Inter-Guild Accords.

     

    IIRC, the original purpose for the Raid Rotation Agreement was to resolve disputes *BETWEEN THE “Big 3”*… Not between any or all of the “Big 3”, and the Public.

     

    Seems to me that if the “Big 3” as they are today, aggregate the advantages they each retain from “Back in the Day”, the “Public” will no longer feel quite as disadvantaged as they do now… And have done for some time.

     

    And equally, the “Big 3” don’t completely lose the advantage that, whilst may not be quite as justifiable based on current Guild activity, reflects the contribution that those “Big 3” Guilds made in earlier days of the Emulator, and the contribution that members of those “Big 3” Guilds continue to make in terms of advice and assistance, to the current Player Base.

     

    Maybe the specifics of my suggestion above might require further tweaking and calibration, or complete rejection in place of another alternative.

     

    But given that this topic seems to have made no further progress towards a resolution than it had 12 months ago… It does seem to me that an alternative to either keeping things as they are, or abolishing the Rotation Agreement altogether, needs to be found.

     

    It’s all about Compromise, isn’t it?

     

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1

  11. Posted

    On 5/29/2016 at 4:41 PM, Xiaolinmantis said:

    @Kyp, thanks. As I stated in my original post though, I did raise a ticket already, but there was no email confirmation (as the system said there would be) and of course I have no ticket ID because of this, so I cannot check the status of the tickets, because I don't even know if the ticket has been logged into the system correctly or not. So I am left confused.

    My Email confirmations for Help tickets *ALWAYS* went into my Spam Folder... Until I instructed my Email client to stop flipping doing that!

    Once you've gotten a single ticket ID, hold onto it. 'Cos entering that single ID (even if it's for a closed ticket) will get you in to see any and all tickets you have logged.

    • Upvote 1

  12. Posted

    On 5/17/2016 at 3:38 AM, Mutant said:

    the only thing i have to say...

    FFA = end of the game !

     

    Or...

     

    If things start getting out-of-hand/unpleasant/Community-destructive with the Raids on FFA..:

    Just revert back to the Raid Rotation.

    Just a thought.

    The primary justification for the Raid Rotation remaining in effect is that: [some time ago, before there was a Raid Rotation] there were lots of arguments and hostility.

    So the Raid Rotation Agreement was implemented.

    If the Raid Rotation Agreement is suspended, in whole or in part, permanently or temporarily, and all Hell breaks loose...

    Just reinstate the Raid Rotation Agreement. (Or a further refined version of it.)

    Not really clear why there should be any problem around this.

    Given the traditionally low server population during the summer, and the generally well-established and amicable community we have of committed players: is there really any fear that there will be a Community breakdown without the Raid Agreement? Or that if things do turn unpleasant, it would be impossible to reinstate the Raid Agreement?

    NB. I feel much more comfortable supporting a temporary suspension of the Raid Agreement now, because since I moved to the country and seen my broadband connection drop from 200Mbps to 1Mbps (I'm not kidding), I'm no longer in a position to be tempted into MB'ng Raids that should more fairly be done by real groups. :)

     

    • Downvote 1

    Posted

    Blimey... Just realised that I had forgotten to vote..!

    Now that I have... And can see I'm in the Bernie Sanders position, I feel like writing a stump speech, holding a rally and getting the voters out for me..!! (Sorry, force of habit.)

    Main point though: if removing me from the poll is going to be complex and potentially require a reset/revote Kyp, don't worry about it. It's only if my supporters are waiting for a last minute surge and it looks like I might make a stalking horse run on Sunday evening, that you may need to strike out my name (or something...).

    :wacko:

    Posted

    Thanks very much for putting my name in the running Kyp (and to those who nominated me). :)

    Sadly... I'm going to have to withdraw my name from the running.

    I'm about to move house this weekend, and it's quite a big move for our family as we'll be leaving London after 20 years and moving out into the 'Sticks. One of the consequences of this is that I'll be exchanging a 200Mbps 'Net connection for a *3* Mbps connection... Really does feel like I'm going to be travelling back in time..!

    Point about that is that I am going to be spending a lot less time In-Game... And I do feel that it is very important that whomever fills the post of Player Advocate, a strong In-Game presence is vital.

    I did have a chat about this with Hestha over the weekend, and also told him that I thought he would make an excellent Player Advocate, because he has that strong In-Game presence, is well-liked by the Community as a whole, and has always struck me as a sensible, mature and very decent individual.

    No offence implied or intended to Mutant, of course... I am just more familiar with Hestha..!

    Hestha did also mention that he was a little nervous about the more Forum-based aspects/duties of the Player-Advocate, primarily because English isn't his first language. I suggested/offered that since English is my first and *ONLY* language.. (!) I would be more than happy to help out on the Forum-side of things... Where my pitiful rural Internet Service Provision won't be as much of an issue!

    For example: if Hestha has gathered a whole load of In-Game Intel, and wants it collated, written up and posted in the Player Advocate section, I can help him out with that. (Same offer applies to you Mutant, if you win the poll. :) )

    Not sure how the above sits with your view of things Kyp..? But I do need to ask you to remove my name from the poll, as I wouldn't want to accept a responsibility that I may not be able to deliver upon..! Apologies for not contacting you off-line and mentioning that... But apart from the occasional Fishbowl, I've been doing rather busy putting things in boxes of late..!

    And good luck to both Hestha and Mutant: I'm sure whichever one of the two takes on the role, they will do an excellent job!

    Posted

    On 4/11/2016 at 10:13 PM, alurra said:

    Thank you for the vote of confidence Holy, however, I am unable to accept this nomination due to my other duties within the Emulator Team. It would be a disservice to all of you players for me to try and wear both a DEV hat and the ADV hat.

    That being said, when I stated in the other thread that I had some ideas about some folks I feel would do a wonderful job in the Advocates role; I would like to nominate

     

    Holyman for Advocate!  ^_^

     

    Heh. 

    Thank you also for the vote of confidence Alurra. :)

    At the risk of getting into a "No, you go-No, you go!" dialogue...(!):

    Before I could or would accept such a nomination, *AND* before you fully and finally recuse yourself from eligibility, I think the role of Player Advocate really needs to be defined more thoroughly.

    The way *I* see it...

    If this were a paid-for Game, with the Development Team working for their own material benefit, the role of Player Advocate would need to be something like a Union Leader or Shop Steward. He or she would be the focal point and nominated representative of those people paying to play the Game, and would be tasked with collating player opinion, and formulating a coherent set of requests (demands?) to be presented to the group of people taking the players' money in return for the Game service and content.

    In such a scenario, it would of course be absolutely vital that the "Player Advocate" was entirely independent of the Development Team, and was understood by all to be fully partisan on the side of the Player Base.

    However... This Emulator is not a paid-for Game. The Team of Developers that keep the Game available, who have put so much energy and time into resurrecting it and maintaining its availability, have done so mostly for the love of the Game; with the opportunity to gain personal experience in their fields of expertise a secondary benefit.

    And with this in mind, I am not at all sure that a "Player Advocate" needs to necessarily demonstrate the same degree of independence from the Development Team that would be expected of someone in the same capacity in a paid-for Game.

    As far as I can see, everyone on the Development Team who is contributing any time at all to the on-going development and support of the Game, is already advocating the needs of the player-base. Why or how would anyone hold the Devs' feet to a flame if it was felt they weren't being appropriately respectful or responsive to players' wishes/demands?

    It strikes me that if the Development Team never developed this Emulator any further, and merely kept the Game running as it is, whilst continuing to iron out any remaining bugs: *THAT* would be entirely to the benefit of players who wish to play (or keep playing) Earth and Beyond.

    What more could or should be expected or demanded..?

    Listening to In-Game Chatter, I think it is fair to say that certain sections of the Player-Base may not have fully grasped the voluntary and beneficent nature of the Development Team's involvement. Consequently, I think there would be an expectation from certain quarters that the Player Advocate would/should be a conduit for those players' requirements (demands...); and if such "requirements" were not met in a timely fashion, then the Player Advocate would be deemed to be ineffective.

    The main reason that I do not think I would be a very good Player Advocate is because my primary allegiance and deference is to the Development Team. In my book, they can literally do no wrong. I can confidently predict that I would spend most of my time as a Player Advocate patiently trying to calibrate and manage players' expectations.

    In short, I think I would do much better as a Developer Advocate than as a Player Advocate..!

    Now if we look at the excellent job you did in your time as Player Advocate Alurra, we see that you were a conscientious, reliable and consistent conduit through which information flowed between the Player-Base and the Development Team. You never affected any airs or graces; you never positioned yourself as being anything other than a function that enabled a continuous flow of information between the two, uh, "Factions"; and your independence or partisanship was never an issue, as you had good relationships with both parties.

    Given that it would be wholly inappropriate (IMO) for anyone in the Player Base to be making demands of the (All-Volunteer) Development Team; and given the entirely understandable preference of the Development Team to just want to deal with a single-point of contact that collated player issues and expectations into a coherent form: I really do not see that your "independence" or neutrality (or lack thereof) should be a blocking issue.

    Of course, if you feel that the demands on your time make being a Player Advocate incompatible with your contributions on the development side of things (and you of all people would know exactly how much time is required to adequately fulfill the role of Player Advocate), then it is entirely your prerogative to decline a return to the role you performed so well. But if it is *JUST* the question of impartiality that is making you reluctant or hesitant, I really do think you can safely ignore that concern.

    Kyp & Co. have a pretty good handle on what upsets and what excites the Player Community. They work to maintain the Balance of the Game, and Kyp's leadership of the Developers and Blacklung's attitude to Game-Mastership ensures that no-one gets carried away with the assumed authorities and privileges of those positions.

    The only effective and realistic function of a "Player Advocate" in this Voluntarily-Developed/Free-to-Play Game, is to act as a conduit for communications between the Player Base and the Development Team. Expectations that the person in the role of "Player Advocate" would be able to facilitate any greater responsiveness to players' demands, are misplaced by a lack of understanding of the nature of this Emulator and the crew that work to keep it flying.

    You have proven to be an excellent manager and coordinator of that flow of communications Alurra, and unless it really is a question of your own time constraints, I really cannot see any reason why your function as a Player Advocate (perhaps the term "Player-Dev Relations Manager" might be more accurate, if not as prosaic..!) should be incompatible with your more direct participation on the Development side of the Game. If anything, I would say your now greater insight into Development activities can only enhance the previous excellent (and vital) job you did keeping everyone informed.

    So there..!

    :P

    • Upvote 2

    Posted

    On 08/04/2016 at 8:43 PM, alurra said:

    I guess we'll see if Kyp opens up a nomination thread. I have a few ideas of some folks who would likely be awesome, if they accepted ;)

    Don't suppose you would consider returning to the post would you Alurra..?

    If we all asked really, really, *REALLY* nicely..!

    :wub:

    • Upvote 3

  21. Posted

    It is impossible for us to mine normally. When I mine, somewhere in my hold is Lev 4-9 ore depending on where I am mining. My hold normally fills up in 12 minutes. Can you imagine the time it will take to try to actually find each specific ore, and then to manually put the ore on top of the correct one when so many of them look alike?

    If you "sort" your cargo hold (by pretty much anything: value, name, type), all the items that are the same will line up next to each other. From there, it is fairly straightforward (if admittedly a bit laborious) to then manually stack them.

     

    I did a Gate Raid last night, and there's a lot to do when multi-boxing one of those..! Whilst the added step of manually stacking the loot was a little more of a chore than usual, it wasn't particularly difficult using the "sort" method.

     

    Wait until your cargo hold fills up; press "sort"; aggregate your stacks; continue filling up your hold: rinse and repeat.

     

    Would be my tip!

     

    I read the Dev's comments as stating this was a temporary dynamic whilst they looked into resolving the exploit potential of the "/craft" command. If we - the Players - are mildly and temporarily inconvenienced whilst the Dev's work to restore what was an innovative and very welcome function, I'm more than happy to accept that inconvenience whilst they see if they can figure it out.

     

    Also:

     

    "If that was not even close to the implied statement from Zack then my next suggestion would be that this information be posted in the ADV section and get Cimbad on the case so he can bring it to the team and see if he can help resolve the issue. That is what we have a player advocate for."

     

    Would it be remiss of me to say that I *REALLY* miss the weekly "Dry Erase Board" and Alurra's outstanding performance as Player Advocate..?

     

    Think this is just the kind of situation that the Player Advocate position exists to mitigate... I don't want to slight or criticise Cimbad, but Alurra was always going to be a tough act to follow... And I just wonder if there might be an option to review the State-of-Play with regards the Player Advocate role.

     

    Just sayin'...

    • Upvote 4
    • Downvote 1

  22. Posted

    Actually have to say that I’m not too fussed if certain dynamic elements like Healer-Aggro, or skills like Enrage and Befriend are not working-as-intended… 

     

    If that is the case (though I’m still not clear that Enrage, Befriend and Healer-Aggro definitely are *NOT* W.A.I... And I'm definitely going to put your tips to the test Matt), then I figure that just adds an extra frisson of challenge to the whole experience.

     

    I created this thread because it just hadn’t occurred to me to compare and contrast finished missions between my two TE’s to see where to pick up the Enrage Skill. But far from feeling embarrassed at my impatience/incompetence, I’m really pleased I did create the thread…

     

    …Because I’ve received some really, *REALLY* helpful tips in the thread and In-Game as a result of creating it.

     

    And I figure that ultimately, I’m playing this Game to encounter and overcome challenges…

     

    Some of those challenges are built-in, and designed to be precisely as they are working… And other challenges are there perhaps because some of the millions of moving parts in this Emulator need a bit of oil and/or T.L.C.

     

    If it’s a choice between diverting Developers to fix or tune micro-aspects of the Game, in order for me to achieve my Chosen Goal… Or having those wonderful moments of understanding when someone /tells you in Game and says: “Have you tried [.....] ?”

     

    I’ll take the latter and keep the bugs, any day of the week.

  24. Posted

    I'm just going for anything that might stand a chance of holding aggro off my healers.

     

    If only merely shooting at a MOB aggravated it... They absolutely despise anyone in the vicinity who is healing and nurturing... Merely shooting at them with the intent to kill them seems to be little more than a minor irritation.

     

    Is my current experience...

×
×
  • Create New...