Ascension!

Discussion about all things related to Chaos Reborn
User avatar
Ped209
Posts: 1622
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by Ped209 » Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:18 pm

You put:

DigitalDuck wrote:From what I understand, you advance from e.g. a Wizard King to a Demigod through other Wizard Kings choosing to serve in your realm. They see your realm as being more beneficial to them than their own, and therefore see you as above them. If you have (say) three or more Wizard Kings serving under you, you can then advance and become a Demigod. As a Demigod you cannot serve under a Wizard King.


I then put how this system could easily abused using exactly the mechanic (albeit different reasons) that you described and you put back in bold letters "it doesn't work like that". Well how does it work? I thought what you put above was an explanation of how you thought it worked?

DigitalDuck wrote:Firstly, for that to even begin to work, your friends would also have to be Kings, and they'd have to agree to serve you in your quickest, most basic realm you can, despite the fact that their rewards would be small, especially compared to serving another King or Demigod.


finding 3 kings when there will probably be hundreds/thousands shouldn't be a problem. Their rewards for being part of my realm might not be great, but once I am a demigod I would be able to give them all kinds of bonuses that would far outweigh what they would get for one appearance in a realm.

DigitalDuck wrote:The whole point is that it's an either/or instead of both.


why not a combination of both, that is what the 'power' system is designed to allow, why must I specialize in 1 area of game play? this is exactly what you accuse my system of at the bottom of your post even though it isn't the case.

DigitalDuck wrote:Meanwhile, your system requires that you perform well in battle in order to operate a guild. Why should battle performance be the deciding factor here?


well so far we seem to have all agreed that battle performance is a prerequisite to obtaining the ability to create realms/populate realms? why is that ok? Saying you must play the game to gain access to the upper levels/bonus content of the game doesn't seem to be an awful thing but that isn't even what the 'power' system is about.

the power system takes into account all of the play styles solo/multiplayer/co-op and realm creation (everything that is available below Demi-God) and would reward the most active/best players/best realm designers. It allows for any combination of the above to contribute towards a 'score' that could get you promoted/demoted depending on how you stack up with others. If you want spend a third of your time playing solo/multi/realm design then you can gain the same score as someone that spends 100% multi or 100% solo.

If we're saying why should you have to be good at any of this to have access to a guild, then why not say 'everyone of any level can have a guild'? I see managing a guild as a reward for achieving a certain level/amount of play (in relation to others). If this is the case then it seems more appropriate being rewarded for playing the game than it does for having 3 friends.

DigitalDuck wrote:You're not required to create realms in order to operate a guild. Similarly, you're not required to perform well in battle in order to operate a guild. You have a choice of which way to ascend.


with that system you're not required to do either of these things, all you're required to do is get people to 'serve' you. I could post on facebook that I'll pay £5 to anyone that'll serve me and there we go, I'm promoted. Certainly cheaper than backing at demigod. I don't want to see promotion descend to 'survival of the spammiest' either, you've not explained how it won't using this method. It just seems so complicated and a lot of extra programming work accommodating a system like this compared

It seems that the guild system is what serving under is. Are we talking about having mini-guilds available at king level? That idea could work, kind of like a platoon within a regiment (or whatever way round it works in the army) but I would see that as a totally separate system to appearing in a realm. Or you might put guild mates into your realms for added bonuses but could just as easily use lords/procedurally generated ones.
Chaos Reborn Community/Tournament Website: http://www.lawandchaos.co.uk

User avatar
DigitalDuck
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 4:24 am
Location: Lincs, UK
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by DigitalDuck » Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:51 pm

Ped209 wrote:I then put how this system could easily abused using exactly the mechanic (albeit different reasons) that you described and you put back in bold letters "it doesn't work like that". Well how does it work? I thought what you put above was an explanation of how you thought it worked?


What I put was an explanation of how it could work, not necessarily how it must work. You seem to be taking it rather rigidly, when the point is "make progression in the metagame based on player interaction in the metagame instead of battle results".

Additionally, what you described was essentially "put three people on the list and BAM! Instant demigod," which is obviously not what any of us wants, so why would we promote a system like that?

Ped209 wrote:finding 3 kings when there will probably be hundreds/thousands shouldn't be a problem. Their rewards for being part of my realm might not be great, but once I am a demigod I would be able to give them all kinds of bonuses that would far outweigh what they would get for one appearance in a realm.
[...]
with that system you're not required to do either of these things, all you're required to do is get people to 'serve' you. I could post on facebook that I'll pay £5 to anyone that'll serve me and there we go, I'm promoted. Certainly cheaper than backing at demigod. I don't want to see promotion descend to 'survival of the spammiest' either, you've not explained how it won't using this method. It just seems so complicated and a lot of extra programming work accommodating a system like this compared


Fine.

A (King): "Hey, I'll pay £5 if you serve me, and I'll give you lots of bonuses!"
B,C,D (Kings): "Okay, we'll do it!"
A (Now Demigod): "Okay, here's your £5, and here are your bonuses!"
B,C,D (Kings with free stuff): "Thanks sucker!" (go elsewhere)
A (Now King again): "... Balls."

Good luck with that. I see no reason why anyone would keep their allegiance past that, so I don't really see that problem existing.

Ped209 wrote:why not a combination of both, that is what the 'power' system is designed to allow, why must I specialize in 1 area of game play? this is exactly what you accuse my system of at the bottom of your post even though it isn't the case.


Except it is. See, however much you may believe

Ped209 wrote:the power system takes into account all of the play styles solo/multiplayer/co-op and realm creation (everything that is available below Demi-God) and would reward the most active/best players/best realm designers. It allows for any combination of the above to contribute towards a 'score' that could get you promoted/demoted depending on how you stack up with others. If you want spend a third of your time playing solo/multi/realm design then you can gain the same score as someone that spends 100% multi or 100% solo.


I would be very surprised if a balance could be struck between battles and realm creation etc. The positions will either be taken up by those spending 100% of their time playing battles, or 100% of their time designing realms, and certainly not both.

It also massively benefits those that spend more of their time playing, and in a system where tournament position determines rank it essentially means that unless you're playing constantly you're never ascending past Wizard Lord.

Ped209 wrote:well so far we seem to have all agreed that battle performance is a prerequisite to obtaining the ability to create realms/populate realms?


I don't remember ever agreeing to that. I've said that "serve under" hasn't been explicitly defined, and that what exactly that entails should be discussed on a per-rank basis.

Ped209 wrote:It seems that the guild system is what serving under is. Are we talking about having mini-guilds available at king level? That idea could work, kind of like a platoon within a regiment (or whatever way round it works in the army) but I would see that as a totally separate system to appearing in a realm. Or you might put guild mates into your realms for added bonuses but could just as easily use lords/procedurally generated ones.


It may well be a totally separate system to appearing in a realm. We haven't discussed exactly what "serve under" means. And I'm agreeing with NoWorries in that details like that shouldn't be discussed until we're all agreed on the general principles of promotion.
Image Ace of Spades
(my latest Dragon Coins rare creature)
XBL | YT
2D or 3D artists, translators needed!

User avatar
Sephorin
GOD
Posts: 2467
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:25 pm
Location: Within the Reverie
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by Sephorin » Tue Aug 26, 2014 5:16 pm

Tess wrote:I always assumed there'd be a separate ranking for pvp etc for those who want to know who's the best at that sort of thing. But experience (whether gained from battles, from being a lord/king in a realm etc) would be merely the way game features are unlocked.


Tess, from my limited understanding of Mr. Gollop's intentions during the Kickstarter, a wizard should be able to advance up the social ranks through:

1. single player or co-op gaming in the Realms of Chaos.
2. PvP and your ELO rating (PvP also grants experience points just like the Realms of Chaos).
3. the artifacts/equipment that the wizard has accumulated.

Mr. Gollop has said that the following will also be a factor at certain ranks:

Wizard Lord: winning battles as an AI controlled defender inside Realms.
Wizard King: winning battles as an AI controlled leader inside Realms, and the rating that adventurers give the realms that the king creates.
Demi-Gods: winning battles as an AI controlled leader inside Realms, and a qualifier based on their guild rating.

These are the main points I have taken away from this thread:

1. Ped, myself, and others have suggested there be a hard cap on the number of players allowed at certain ranks. This cap should be based on the number of total active players in the game.

2. NoWorries has suggested that players should form a "feudal pyramid" instead of having a hard cap. NoWorries also suggests that promotion to higher social ranks should be based mostly on the function that a given social rank is to perform in the game. (I.E., if you are good at creating realms, you should be a queen. If you are good at running guilds, you should be a demi-god.)

3. Ped has suggested a power/prestige system wherein you accumulate points for your social advancement based on a certain set of criteria. Folks would steadily lose prestige over time, so an inactive player who does not continuously gather prestige would eventually be demoted from her social rank to make room for more active players.

4. NoWorries wants demi-gods who are very good at running a guild to be mostly immune to demotion even if they do not spend time leveling up their wizard or equipment. Same with Queens who are great at realm creation.

5. DigitalDuck agrees with this and the feudal pyramid idea (I think) and would also like to see players able to ascend through a "paradigm of force" in addition to a "paradigm of responsibility."

6. Ped and Tess are concerned about the implications of player voting within a feudal pyramid. Would such a system induce bribery or degenerate into a teenage popularity contest?

EDIT: added a bit about Digital Duck and the paradigm of force.
Last edited by Sephorin on Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sephorin, living in service to the Goddess Ariianrhod since April, 1204.

User avatar
SpiteAndMalice
DEMIGOD
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:45 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by SpiteAndMalice » Tue Aug 26, 2014 5:48 pm

Good summary there Sephorin, you forgot about me however; I want to sew chaos and destruction, and when I say 'sew' I mean it; I'm going to sew chaos into a nice cardigan and then make a matching bobble hat out of destruction. ;-)

EDIT - I decided against a scarf of mayhem, they're a bit itchy.
Image

The Guild of the Cephalopods is now recruiting - We embrace all.

- Chief Tentacle Arranger in The Guild of the Cephalopods.

User avatar
DigitalDuck
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 4:24 am
Location: Lincs, UK
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by DigitalDuck » Tue Aug 26, 2014 5:54 pm

Sephorin wrote:These are the main points I have taken away from this thread:

1. Ped, myself, and others have suggested there be a hard cap on the number of players allowed at certain ranks. This cap should be based on the number of total active players in the game.

2. NoWorries has suggested that players should form a "feudal pyramid" instead of having a hard cap. NoWorries also suggests that promotion to higher social ranks should be based mostly on the function that a given social rank is to perform in the game. (I.E., if you are good at creating realms, you should be a queen. If you are good at running guilds, you should be a demi-god.)

3. Ped has suggested a power/prestige system wherein you accumulate points for your social advancement based on a certain set of criteria. Folks would steadily lose prestige over time, so an inactive player who does not continuously gather prestige would eventually be demoted from her social rank to make room for more active players.

4. NoWorries wants demi-gods who are very good at running a guild to be mostly immune to demotion even if they do not spend time leveling up their wizard or equipment. Same with Queens who are great at realm creation.

5. DigitalDuck agrees with this and the feudal pyramid idea (I think). Ped and Tess are concerned about the implications of player voting within a feudal pyramid. Would such a system induce bribery or degenerate into a teenage popularity contest?


This seems accurate to me. That said, while I agree with players fulfilling their responsibilities being immune or near-immune to demotion, I also agree with the idea of players able to get into power through force alone as a possibility, and would like to see that too.

Since we're having a quick break here, I'd like to say that I mean no animosity to anyone in this thread - I'm merely a fan of a good discussion and there's no discussion without disagreements. Sometimes I can come across a bit strong, and I'm sorry about that.
Image Ace of Spades
(my latest Dragon Coins rare creature)
XBL | YT
2D or 3D artists, translators needed!

User avatar
NoWorries
GOD
Posts: 5039
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:17 am
Location: Baldrlux.com
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by NoWorries » Tue Aug 26, 2014 5:56 pm

There have been statements that we all agree on certain points. This is not correct. We don't have a consensus from this thread. But our reaching consensus is not important. What is important is that the developers have access to our various points of view and ideas. In this regard, I believe that this thread is a tremendous success, as many points of view have been expressed and many ideas presented. My only regret is that I have not thus far goaded Ped209 to quote Spiderman's philosophy about power and responsibility. Alas. Anyway, here are some additional points that may add to the discussion:

We need to figure out what is an active player at each social rank to manage inclusion of backers who purchased it. We have well over 1,300 backers who have purchased a social rank of Lord/Lady or higher. A number of them will never attempt to engage with the tools of their social rank. Many if not most of them will stop playing the social-strategic aspects of the game within weeks or months after starting. That said, these backers are likely to keep logging in to the game at least sporadically to check up on things or, more likely, just to play the quick matches against AI opponents. So if we screen for active players solely by the dates of logins, we won't truly capture those players that are genuinely active in the social-strategic aspects of the game related to their social rank. We need some other measurements. And a discussion about these measurements may help frame some of the possibilities that help merge the Paradigm of Power with the Paradigm of Responsibility.

For example, consider realms separately from Kings/Queens which are their primary stewards. The theme of this game centers around fragments of 14th century Earth surviving because of powerful magical interventions. What mechanics fuel the creation and preservation of realms, or at least allows for their access through Limbo? Perhaps loot can be exchanged by Kings/Queens+ to create a realm, level up a realm, or simply sustain a realm? (For discussion about this idea, see the thread here. I encourage you to direct comments about the merit of the idea in that thread.) Or what if XP or Mana could do something similar? (For details and comments on this idea, please see the thread here.) In other words, a realm perhaps could exist and thrive only if its King/Queen+ steward invests loot, XP, or mana in it. Thus, a thriving realm is disassociated from a popularity contest. And realm creators could simply use the procedural realm creation process if they do not want to customize their realm. This means that any type of player could satisfy the Paradigm of Responsibility by investing the fruits of their gameplay into their realm. And by this measure, the players who invest the most in preserving or upgrading their realm would be the safest from demotion. But what does this have to do with backers and activity? Simple. A King/Queen whose realm is destroyed or gets disconnected from Limbo is deemed inactive. These would be the King/Queens that are the most vulnerable to demotion if they are not backers. And if they are backers, then they are irrelevant.

Realms then could become rare loot in all game modes. What if very rarely, successfully defeating a Wizard King/Queen allows for the victor to usurp the realm. (Perhaps only if the victor is at least a Lord/Lady? And perhaps only as to procedurally created realms?) If the victor already has a realm, then they could sell it or, if they are a Demigod+, more likely create a tournament where the realm becomes a prize, or else hand it out in a feudal way. Additionally, there could be multi-player tournaments over who gets to become the King/Queen+ of wizardless realms which may get "discovered" from time to time. Acquiring a realm would result in promotion to King/Queen. Thus, advancement could be achieved socially, by luck, or by merit through each of the game's modes.

I am wed only to the Paradigm of Responsibility and not any particular means to implement it. Some have said that my posts so far speak to certain answers to questions concerning the methods of social rank demotion and promotion. I cling to no certain answer. Rather, I cling to the Paradigm of Responsibility which is a lens by which we can judge proposed methods.
___________________________
  • One Theme to rule them all, One Theme to find them, One Theme to bring them all and in the Chaos bind them.
    NoWorries plays as Baldr, God of Wonder & Progress | Compete together with Baldr in the Order of Baldrlux

User avatar
Ped209
Posts: 1622
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by Ped209 » Tue Aug 26, 2014 7:27 pm

DigitalDuck wrote:Since we're having a quick break here, I'd like to say that I mean no animosity to anyone in this thread - I'm merely a fan of a good discussion and there's no discussion without disagreements. Sometimes I can come across a bit strong, and I'm sorry about that.


I'll start by agreeing with DigitalDuck on that one and say I do the same (we agreed on something!) it's all in the spirit of debating the merits of the ideas though.

With great flowers comes great re-spoonability!

I'm tired of disagreeing with other peoples ideas and what not for the time being so I'm just gonna take some time out to flesh out my own then I'll put it back up for a good slapping!
Chaos Reborn Community/Tournament Website: http://www.lawandchaos.co.uk

User avatar
NoWorries
GOD
Posts: 5039
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:17 am
Location: Baldrlux.com
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by NoWorries » Tue Aug 26, 2014 8:09 pm

Ped209 wrote:
DigitalDuck wrote:Since we're having a quick break here, I'd like to say that I mean no animosity to anyone in this thread - I'm merely a fan of a good discussion and there's no discussion without disagreements. Sometimes I can come across a bit strong, and I'm sorry about that.

I'll start by agreeing with DigitalDuck on that one and say I do the same (we agreed on something!) it's all in the spirit of debating the merits of the ideas though.

This thread has one of the better debates so far in these forums. We're talking at each other's ideas a tad bit, but we're also growing our own ideas in the process. More than not, we're engaging with each other's ideas respectfully. It's a real pleasure. And If Julian or his team read this far, I think they have some excellent points from all sides of the spectrum to consider.

Ped209 wrote:With great flowers comes great re-spoonability!

:shock:
___________________________
  • One Theme to rule them all, One Theme to find them, One Theme to bring them all and in the Chaos bind them.
    NoWorries plays as Baldr, God of Wonder & Progress | Compete together with Baldr in the Order of Baldrlux

User avatar
Ped209
Posts: 1622
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by Ped209 » Tue Aug 26, 2014 8:17 pm

if Julian or any of his team read the whole thread to this point we should all feel a little guilty at wasting 6 weeks of time that could've been spent developing the game ;)
Chaos Reborn Community/Tournament Website: http://www.lawandchaos.co.uk

User avatar
SpiteAndMalice
DEMIGOD
Posts: 6276
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:45 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Ascension!

Post by SpiteAndMalice » Wed Sep 21, 2016 5:43 pm

Given the proposal for changes to the social ranking system, I thought I'd bump this thread and ask; Are there ideas and suggestions within it that are still valid and could be made use of within any new system?
Image

The Guild of the Cephalopods is now recruiting - We embrace all.

- Chief Tentacle Arranger in The Guild of the Cephalopods.

Locked