Acceptable Solo Topic's for Prestige

Hello,

a simple question

Do you think its fair/right that people who solo topic's and/or do topic's of little to no important earn prestige just by posting?

Or do you think that soloing a topic, you shouldn't get prestige just for posting?


I'm not really a fan of "Yes/No" as those don't show what is attempted to be gained. I personally, think its not fair you walk into a forest, write a whole page yelling at a tree, and walk out with the ability to purchase a B rank Weapon/Ability/Skill/Upgrade. I think the previous PAC system was more than thoughtful enough to remove the "forest to master' aspect. Ain't no Yoda's in these woods

I feel gaing prestige per a post should be taken out all together

Wait wait wait.....Ok we have a topic open now about how prestige costs are too high. Now we are getting complaints about getting free prestige from posting....guys understand my frustration here. I'm leaving things open to members....but we need to stick to a standard and understand everyone is not gonna get what they want completely.You get these increments for posting because we know the prices are a bit on the higher scale for abilities and it absorbs some of that, it encourages posting, and solo topics will only be allowed in certain areas anyways. Where the prestige will be significantly lower per post in areas delegated as solo rp approvable.

Well, I understand your frustrations, believe me I do. But this isn't really a complaint, just a vote. To myself, members are more than one person, and can have more than one thought. We shouldn't be lumped into one side or another.

I get prestige from just posting OOC comments..... or for replying to things. I know forumotion, its impossible to set "solo" rps as less expensive than regular rps. Unless you plan on having New York Normal and New York Solo forums. As of yet, I did not, nor do I know anyone that knew of solo allowed in certain area's. I was not here when prestige costs were "too high" nor was I here when it was decided upon that prestige should be per post. I do understand, but if it is a beta test, and it is possible to have things be contradicting, I don't believe this to be one of those cases.

Also, I'm all for sticking to a standard, and understand how majority works. However, (as of this post) 3 yes and 5 no in prestige costs, to myself doesn't show overwhelming support in either direction.

Recap

Not complaining about free prestige
Asking if its acceptable that people who solo get prestige
Asking if its acceptable to get prestige from just posting OOC wise

Amen, I do understand how frustrating it can be, but this isn't a two sided coin issue. I believe you can have both, and am fully ready to offer solutions (while as you said, not what everyone wants completely) to such problems.

Two Possible Solutions

1.

Amen wrote:

You get these increments for posting because we know the prices are a bit on the higher scale for abilities and it absorbs some of that

Why not just increase the amount of prestige you get from grading? If you want to offset the higher prices, even 1-3 posts can make a world of difference.

2.

Amen wrote:

Now we are getting complaints about getting free prestige from posting

Prestige shouldn't be free, it should be worked for. You shouldn't get it for OOC, general discussion, intro's etc etc. Perhaps even taking that part away can alleviate some feelings as people who post (lets say 5-8 times in OOC per topic a day) in such area's for free points. I myself would feel better knowing some "spammer" ( a term I use lightly imagine making 15 solid posts a day in OOC area's... 105 points a week... we both know certain people can do that) can't get large points just for doing 0 work except complaining or ass kissing.

I don't mean to sound harsh, or rude. Prestige can be too high, and free things can be bad at the same time. Not saying they are, but they could be and not be related to each other at all.

Sorry for the long post, but I figured better to give some idea's than just blame others.

Again I said I would designate AREAS as solo rp only and reduce the prestige in those AREAS.


1. Grading isn't really going to be a primary thing it's being discussed if we still even want it. PAC is time consuming and a heavy work load on staff which is part of the reason it was always backed up to high hell here and on ingoo. You have several times the amount of members as staff who have to read every post of every topic and calculate scores. It is very time consuming if you are doing it the way it is supposed to be done. Among the other duties staff has that is labor heavy and having members waiting days for prestige because PAC is the primary source imo and the opinion of staff is site suicide.

2. If you know forumotion you should know you can set it so prestige is not given in certain areas like occ designated spots. Only rp zones are given prestige bonuses.The primary thing is getting things done smoothly, getting people active and posting, and maintaining balance.....oh and most of all having fun. As much as I would like to go in with the surgical knife and do everything with precision I also have the burden of thinking about what is feasible. Such things include what my staff can support, being overly technical(which we just experienced), and creating a stress free environment where people can have fun. The positive about the site dying before is i got to see a lot of trial and error and a lot of flaws in things that were done earlier. To do the same thing and expect a different outcome would be ....insane. That being said a different approach is needed .....Realistically speaking some members and even staff are gonna be die hard, some will be seasonal, others will be gone in the next month or so(though everyone will tell you they are die hard). With that being said we have to prepare for longevity so no matter what the show goes on. The easiest way to do this is to be able to have a system that is easily managed. For the most part prestige in areas can be regulated....will a few posts slip through the cracks? Maybe.... but it is better than an area being flooded with topics and having to wait on being graded. That makes members impatient and antsy, user errors on the staffs part from reading countless topics. You have to look at the big picture....

If really need be i can handle grading Prestige. As you have all already seen my skill with the system. As i pretty much ran Pac on Ingoo for like 3 months by myself. I can even train others to do it. And inforce rules for Prestige mods like Lily did requiring them to have to do at least 10 topics a Weak. And if any contraversy happens over grading i would personally look at the topic myself. (Considering i tend to read or at least glance over most RP topics as well) Doing prestige really wouldent be a bother to me if it helped the site out.

Amen wrote:

Again I said I would designate AREAS as solo rp only and reduce the prestige in those AREAS.

I did read that, I also said that neither I, nor anyone I talked to knew this. In fact, I couldn't find it posted anywhere. I understand its a beta, and not everything is finished. But please, do not fault me because no information contradicting it was present. I do not subscribe the to the "don't assume" club, so don't use a "well you shouldn't assume crap".

Amen wrote:

You have several times the amount of members as staff who have to read every post of every topic and calculate scores. It is very time consuming if you are doing it the way it is supposed to be done. Among the other duties staff has that is labor heavy and having members waiting days for prestige because PAC is the primary source imo and the opinion of staff is site suicide.

I do not recall this being an issue. Sure, there were times when things were tight. I never recall members being so overwhelming for staff here. I hate to say it, but ingoo had a lot of members, and looking statistically. The most people we had on at once was 33. If we do some basic math. 33 members, lets round up a little and say (we have 6 staff now going by staff table) we had 8 staff members active at the time. 33-8 (Because those 8 can't check there own prestige) = 25 members. If each of those 8 staff took just 2 members to check prestige. That's 16+ 8 (Since staff checks each others) = 24 which basically covers the entire site, with one or 2 staff doing 3-4 prestige at a time. That doesn't even factor in staff whose sole job was prestige, which means they should be handling 4-5 members at a time. Logistically, it shouldn't be a time consuming issue if all staff is doing there job and working hard. From what I remember, several staff didn't do prestige, were inactive from time to time, or just lazy and remained on staff. IMO Prestige used to be handled very well here, considering we didn't have 50+ members rping daily. I don't think PAC was the issue, I think it was staff's diligence and willingness to handle PAC that caused suicide. Don't blame a system for lack of work, blame those who didn't do the work. I believe we can cut WAY down on prestige grading suicide by some simple guidelines.

1. No Solo topics can earn prestige
2. No training topic's can earn prestige
3. Social topics need to be clearly indicated when asking for a grade. (Social means 0 combat). Social Topics get a low priority vs combat topics.
4. Have 3-4 designated staff do PAC and only PAC. Each of them is responsible for a group of 4-5 members each. Lets go wide and say 4*5 = 20 + (each others) that's 24 members. If you notice one "group" is lagging, you know which staff is at fault and can blame them and fix the problem, rather than blaming a system.
5. All staff at all levels should do at least 2 prestige grading a week, in case of absences, mistakes, large influx of members etc etc.

Sorry I kinda called you out. It really bother's me that it seems like you aren't looking objectively at the facts. The numbers don't lie in the statistic section, I can see how many topic's were made each month, and the numbers don't indicate a huge overwhelming burden on staff. They do show a reasonable drop in activity from staff, which resulted in a drop in member activity, which resulted in a drop off in the site. If I do some rough math justice here

I get 67 -72 posts a week that need to be graded for prestige. If everyone on staff did 1 prestige topic a week, they would have to read 11-14 posts and grade them. That doesn't seem like a over loaded huge burden. In fact, that seems pretty reasonable. And that's the entire site history, at our peak super active times. Sorry to seem snide, but do you honestly think its a huge burden for staff to read at worst 14 posts a week and grade them?

(I can pm you all the math I did to calculate that)

The reason you do not see it anywhere is because it was a suggestion to alleviate the problem not something that has already been carved out. There was a problem here as well as ingoo and you are right it was due to staff coming in and out but the same went as far as members. You can't say "well if staff wasn't lazy fire them" when members were popping in and out just as frequently. They were not friends they were who were the most consistent out of the inconsistent. I am not offended by being called out but lets turn the tables... you have good ideas and could have been staff yourself to help with some of the things going on at the time but you too disappeared...correct? That being said replacing a rotating staff with a pool of rotating members puts me in the same position. The most reliable person I had then was Chrony staff wise. The most reliable people I have now are Timu and Keita and those are the facts. As much as I would love to have a dream team staff the fact of the matter is usually staffers start out strong, they level out, then most burn out. However, that's neither here nor there.

The numbers you posted are a bit deceiving....Let me tell you why. Both sites where the PAC system existed at that time also accepted word counts. We agreed to eliminate word counts all together.....you also want us to eliminate prestige per post. So what you are asking for is a Stand alone prestige system sole relying on PAC. Ingoo and MU are not the first to use this system and in every site where the system is used, it is an alternative for those who prefer the purity of roleplay and plot over grinding. It's intent is to be an equalizer for those people. You are right, there is nothing wrong with the system....IF it is used how it was intended(an alternate route). If you make this system the primary/sole way to accrue prestige it's not gonna be good. Hence why I say it will be taxing....the system is not made to be stand alone for an entire site.

Personally, I really hate when people tell me what kind of RPing I can do, just because it's not what they like to do.

I hated the idea of topic grading when the site first had it, I just went along with it but my god was it slow, limiting and boring. A lot of people put their heart and effort into their posts and then having a staff come up and say "that's weak" just because said staff member can "do better" based on their OPINION blows my mind. I say leave the system as is because there's really nothing wrong with it.

Prestige per post is fair. Solo topics are fine for equal prestige because sometimes solo topics fit into someone's style and character development. Some people talk to themselves every now and then.

And RARELY do you see a solo topic with more than 3 or 4 posts alone because MOST people who do solo topics do all their writing in one huge post. It makes more sense that way. Usually a training topic has a bunch of post when it involves training between 2 or more people which can become developmental with dialogue and interaction between characters.

I hate the whole black and white, this is training blah blah, you can only do this in training topics blah blah. It's so limiting and takes away from spontaneity. Saying if you label a topic as a social topic then no combat can happen in that topic just stops SOOOOO much more from being possible. A fateful encounter that can change characters. RP shouldn't be so controlled outside of power balances. Other than that, let the members shape the world through their various personalities and goals. It seems more fun that way.

If you want certain rules and restrictions for your topic, how about just run it by those participating with you and if you all agree then fine. But in no way should a member be able to force another member to adhere to THEIR style of RP just through the label of a topic. Also why I personally don't like "Private" topics that are private just because someone labeled it such. People often hide behind these topics to keep others from finding them after let's say for example they took something from that person.

So yeah, I see no issue with how things are now. People should be able to earn prestige per post as opposed to ONLY topic rates. I don't see an issue with people earning prestige from solo and/or training topics. I also don't think it should be any less. Labeling topics for "social only" or "private/invite" only also shouldn't be enforced in my opinion either. All of these things tend to force others to adhere to someone elses RPing style through "backhanded incentives". Let people RP how they want with their characters without trying to influence them through less prestige or topic label roadblocks.

Previously, wasn't PAC all we had, in a stand alone system?

I understand PAC had word count, but word count doesn't effect post count. So the math isn't deceiving that part of it. I just used the numbers the site provided for me.

Last I was here, I was unaware there was an alternative to PAC. Could you refresh my memory and tell me what it was? Like, I had no clue how to get prestige without using the PAC system, I should have used it lmao.

But you are right, if one needs to do it, it should be a stand alone system. And I should offer a solution.

@ Z

I find the opposite to be true. There seems to be a few misunderstandings in your post about what I said. I specifically mentioned social, only when it goes to grading, which means once the topic is completed. Same with private topics etc etc. Also, aren't you telling us how you like to rp and how rp should be based on what you like in a rp? I think that's an odd stance to take.

Now, I'm not sure where you've rp'd. But on the places I've been on, people, a solid number of them are assholes, and they are assholes just to be assholes. Rarely do I see people really hide in private topics, but they usually do it with just cause. Such as them being hunted OOC wise because someone doesn't like them. Of course, the second one calls them on it, we are limiting how they rp, and how there character should act. Such is the nature of double sided swords. I more often than not find that people soloing/training for 3-4 months to become super powerful.

I think in such cases, people tend to forget that roleplaying is not an individual or sole sport. I would use the word entitled, but your post was much better than some self entitled asshole. I will say, many many people feel entitled in there rp, and I feel your way encroaches into the very way you say we should avoid, which is forcing your way as a "better" way or "free" way. I've seen many kinds of rp'ers, and the worst are the ones that cloak themselves and hide behind freedom and entitlement. They don't care you are actually role-playing with someone, they don't like you, they want your power, so they randomly join your topic and kill you. Then if we have private topics, started before they ever joined, they complain someone is hiding, just because they refuse to become another power gem for this "entitled" savior of rping. RPing should be about fun, fun for all, and yes that does limit people. Perhaps an arsonists thinks its fun burning people alive, extreme example, but in a rp sense not so much. Why is it a horrid thing to trample on his rights and freedoms, but when he ruins the fun of others (By taking away there rights/freedoms) its an acceptable outcome? Sure people die, sure in marvel there are lots of battles, and lots of killing, but if we are to be the "main characters" or have "our own comic book" style play, then we aren't the fodder that gets killed by a stray bullet.

I am all for freedom, and I think having fun for everyone in the community is important. But I will fight for fun/entertainment above the rights of a few. Especially when it comes to people who use freedom of play, to ruin the fun of others. That shouldn't happen, and it shouldn't be allowed. That includes someone who really just wants to powerplay, to maim and kill, to sit in the woods and write a fanfic. These are best left away, for they are the easiest abuses and the most troublesome to get rid of. One may think, they aren't so bad, but like giving someone the ability to manipulate time, the cosmos or the universe, it ends up being a limitation that is placed for the common benefit. You said, rp shouldn't be controlled outside of power balances, but I think that's a very small view. I think members (as a whole, not just 2-3 people) entertainment/fun value should be what is considered first. Power Balances start with making sure fun is number one, not the entitled right to have a site be about your (singular) fun.

I just can't agree with the idea that freedom should come before fun of all those present on such sites. I liked how the system was before, and I'm going to try and create a PAC system to go back to that. Because I don't think a grind fest is the way to handle this site.

Word counts as in S Rank=500 words, B Rank =300 words....that is what ingoo used prior to, during, and after PAC lol. This site also used word count training then....What I mean by numbers are deceiving is most people then did strictly word counts and never/hardly touched PAC. IMO PAC was never intended to be a stand alone system and it shouldn't be. Z brought up a great point when he says rp styles vary and what I think is epic you might think is meh....and PAC grading system is very opinionated. Most people then wanted hard numbers that did not fluctuate because of someone else. If I am a high caliber rper my standards will be higher and you will receive a lesser score than if you had a higher quality of rp than the person grading you. As I stated before this system is not designed to support an entire site. It is a slow and tedious process that requires a constant and alert staff to pipeline topics. It may work while we are in beta but not if we gain any actual growth.