Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
0) I would intentionally omit names and some details to (try to) to keep that "failure analisys" instead of "attacks". Idea is to try to brainstorm on some problems instead of just blaming each other. Its also a bit more community/player centric view, but because of my background I can tune into dev or adm modes at least partially.
Funny, cause especially behind the curtains attacking and blaming everybody is almost all you do all the time.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1) Unpopular changes: sometimes they're needed. Badly. Doesnt means its ok to destroy community. Many MMORPGs had exodus. Commercial MMOs could just fire ppl, solved. We dont have such luxury. "MMORPG is community" bites. Some changes MUST be SMALL and GRADUAL. Even if it takes longer and more efforts. Long story short, recently I loved idea (of assasin nerf, etc) as such - but ended up very frustrated by actual implementation, deeply regretting day I bothered devs on certain topics aroung game mechanic quirks.
Here you say changes must be small and gradual, yet me saying the same about the abrupt level cap raise is wrong because it would take away the fun...
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.1) We wouldnt stand much more hits like this. Staffers and active players try to keep community together, their time and efforts spent on this worth of some respect, not any worse than dev time. Nobody comes to servers to feel like 2nd-class citizen. Can I honestly say sometimes it felt like that?
You were witnessed more than once in trying to bring up players against devs with false claims... i do not see how making devs second class citizens and portraying them as villains will help anything.
.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.2) Use testing server and get feedback if in slightest doubt. DO NOT NEGLECT THIS. Please. It does a lot of damage.
Already commented on this several times. Others might comment on it, it is not my forte.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1,3) If test server isnt in shape, its IMO something urgent for admins.
Already commented on this several times. Others might comment on it, it is not my forte.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.4) If someone can't perform change reasonably, lack of time, overload, RL, etc: IMO they should reconsider, re-plan, re-schedule, delegate, cooperate, defer, whatever. If all fails, ok: you can't deliver feature in shape suitable for prod env. Put that into TODO list or scrap it, etc. Nobody comes to servers to enjoy breakage. Breaking things does damage. Please understand it.
Remember... we are not loan slaves, we are all volunteers. And your claim that all we do is breaking stuff is, to put it politely, ridiculous.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.5) Rebirth system is interesting but in TMW it's multifold thing. GY and crypt areas made players reach lv99 too fast. Then its "game over", ppl quit. Just 3-4 times of it doesnt changes much. Real fix for THAT is big, complicated, means HUGE nerf to MANY monsters. Personally I think this pain woudln't be worth of it.
And again, you are shutting down ideas without even asking about how it would be implemented, just relying on a single word.
Leveling by grinding != fun/engaging gameplay. Having the max level in check and reachable in a sane timeframe would allow to implement interesting end game content (like e.g. challenging and rewarding dungeons) instead (which is hardly possible atm for already explained reasons). Players could either take part in that or decide to "rebirth" and level again for certain benefits. (Or have one character they keep at max level and one they use to go down the rebirth route).
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.6) If should choose between "technically correct" and "happy players" I prefer happy players. Servers without players are boring, (re)bootstrapping MMO community is nightmare. So lvl 135 upsets devs, but community-wise it did lot of good, revitalizing community and bringing TMW to proper MMO state. Many MMOs designed to be played "forever". TMW like got this aspect fixed.
The point is not, that level 135 "upsets devs", the point is, that it makes very needed end game content creation and developing long term fun gameplay almost impossible for already explained reasons and because of that takes away much potential fun. So yeah, with all that what i have in mind is (long term) player happiness.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.7) With changes like GY/Crypt TMW became fast to level. Casuals who're serious to stay level reasonably in at most few days. So problem exists, hurts, but IMO its magnitude is "small". Compared to numerous more pressing matters. Like eg unbalanced PvP where warriors cant do a thing vs ranged classes.
Everything much past 99 is only either for hardcore grinders or hardcore bots. As you like to to take pride in how much time you spend in the game you should well know that! There are not even a hand full of casuals that are way beyond lvl 100 (including you). So casual players will take 30 years and hardcore grinders will take one. Not exactly balanced.
The game never was PVP centric. Balancing PvE and PvP equally without seperating it ( = having modified versions of stats and skills for PvP) was tried by many many MMOs and in the end it is not possible to have both balanced without a skew. There are clever ways to implement PvP into a game. LOTROs approach comes to mind where on a certain map players can log in with a mob-characters and fight as monster against Players - so there are ways to deal with it but atm it is low on priority list.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.8 ) It also prompts casuals to request help of highlevels. It improves "community re-integration" and "MMO aspect". Its MMO. Players interaction to be encouraged.
As said, it is a double edged sword. The need for casuals to get help from power gamers instead of facing challenges on an equal footing is not exactly what most would consider fun.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.9) As TMW's 18 years shown its possible to live with weird game mechanics and simple content if community makes up for that. I understand it hurts sense of perfection but let's keep it at check. Do we want beautiful world with superb mechanics if happens to be empty? We have to live with community we got and their prefs and expectations.
Of course we need to keep the actual player base happy (that we both highly disagree on the best way to do this does not give you the right to constantly claim that the devs would work against the players). But it is also our duty to bring in new players and make the game fun for as many players as possible instead of tailoring it to two or three. (With unpaid devs, a "tailored to few" game would inevitably be tailored for the devs making it - that has to be avoided strictly).
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.10) I believe there's a lot of room for improvement in this area around dev, addm, GM and players coop. Unfortunately it means devs eventually should leave their comfort zone, face inconvenient thnigs and stick to some compromises. Concrete example: Chronos shop. I know you disliked implementaton. But community-wise it did us a lot of good, revitalizing, sparking boss battles. So, THANK YOU. A LOT. For this idea. And even if its not about dev, its still appreciation of thing that did us a lot of good.
Glad you like it, this idea - like many many ideas were - almost got shut down immediately by the same thing i criticize in my post: Rejection without even discussing the whys and hows. And yes, i am unhappy with (part of) the implementation. A part of it worked (making boss battles a thing again and Candor runs more attractive - you see i am not just grabbing these ideas from thin air, Micksha and me worked on that quite some time), part of it is wasted potential now (but nobody was interested in even listening why it is wasted potential and to discuss ways to change that).
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.11) Content for high levels helps to ensure players have things to do and dont quit on "game over". Helps to keep community going.
1.12) Getting high level is +1 reason to dwell on server and co-operate with other players. Good for community/MMO part.
Yes... but for that this high level content needs to be reachable by everyone and for that a sane level cap would be much better. With a rebirth system players can kind of choose to level beyond this level cap (rebirth is, as said only one possible alternative, i have other potential ideas and afaik HoraK has one or two, too) if they wish (and that way open up the possibility to add new mid game quests, too, as these can then be experienced by them with an appropriate level without the need to make a new char) and still everybody could take part in tailored end game content. Leveling and growing can be a big part of the fun of MMOs, but it is not the only source of fun! In many good MMOs it is almost only the tedious "must do" before the fun part starts.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.13) Power gamers are balance problem. I know it very well. But they proven to be very important and devoted part of community that holds MMO aspect together. If they quit whole thing would likely collapse. Take them as "difficulty bonus", not "trouble". And, honestly, if it keeps them addicted and they stay, it overall does community good. The only problematic location in this regard is Keshlam Swamp. It separated badly it causes community fragmentation, but it's "manageable" in my book.
No. everybody in the community is equally important. As i said: all play styles including (but nor limited to) power gaming should be equally fun and engaging. And yes, the swamp as it is now is a very good example why the level cap raise was a bad move with quite a big impact.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.14) Some ppl got weird belief in "number of commits" thing. I even know some projects (its not about TMW fortunately) who got sneaky ppl inflating their commits to look important while it not really something useful, just looking cool on metrics. Hopefully we're not moving this direction? I can imagine it can be quite fatal for MMORPGs. E,g, I'm not chaingun and prefer to do few "precision" takes on some few bugs that annoyed me most. It could be small chage, but impact could be measurable. Are 20 commits to aux text more important than e.g. figuring and fixing thing that LOCKED MY CLIENT UP IN CANDOR? There's not even commit in git attributed to me, I merely sent XML diff to Led. Guess I'm "getting gameplay going" person. But for some reason I felt tempted to come with shameless self advertisement once ppl bring this. I believe such activity worth of some credit, no? Or do you ppl prefer to have 20 typos fixed, while CLIENT IS LOCKING UP ON BOSS BATTLES? Who of players would bother about typos if they can't play it?
The number of commits were never a thing and will never be. My commits are mostly not done by myself (i think i did like 2 way back then). I send sprites over to someone more knowledgeable with git and let them commit for me - or have a part in developing ideas and game mechanics (like e.g. chronos shop) that make it into the game (more or less) without me having done a commit... still it counts as dev activity (and that is only interesting internally to see if a dev is still actively involved in developing or needs to become adviser, but not for "credits" or "fame" - if you search for that: you will not find it here.) Contributions of non devs are always welcome of course.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.15) There're things like severity, priority and impact. Priority of problem highly depends on impact it causes. Even if something is a problem, but there're 299153 more pressing matters, guess what... but ofc it can be nailed down quickly and doesnt causes new problems, why not? Previous thing gives good example on this topic.
Severity, Priority, Impact AND availability. If there's no one willing or available to fix it, it won't be fixed. Welcome to FLOSS, if you don't like it, make a Merge Request.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
1.16) Guess you only know some of these things by dwelling on server for a while and seeing how game mechanic REALLY performs in practice. I doubt dev guides readily tell you all such details or certain workable tradeoffs that proven to work on certain server.
I am, with some breaks from time to time a player of this game and contrary to your believe that you like to state loud and often i listen to players and watch how they play through various channels. My conclusions differs from yours, though.
While it is good when devs can also play the game, depending on what part of the game a dev is working on being an always active player is sometimes not needed and sometimes can even be an obstacle in several ways (e.g. time allocation, or by not being fully able to differentiate between "what i want as an individual player" and "what would be best for the game/the broad playerbase" etc.). Also the game is not the only channel of communication (may it be direct or indirect) between players and devs. (By the way GMs are supposed to be one, too, that is actually why GM became a community vote)
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
2) Best motivation I ever found in opensource is doing something (maybe eventually cool) that I would be happy to at least use myself. Or obliterating some bug that bothered me and my friends, like mentioned client lockup at intense battle. I can imagine its why I think it helps a lot to actually dwell on game server. Abstract things dumped out of nowhere feel cold blooded, unfriendly, and my experience suggests it much harder to get it right like that. But I wouldnt insist its the only way. Maybe there could be some hybrid interactions or something, ideas how to improve this aspect are welcome.
Again, nothing that is done by devs comes out of thin air. Many things are discussed and talked about in various locations (some open to public, some to TMWT only, some only to devs and some just private chats) - sometimes for a long time. Finding compromises is often hard and frustrating but that is just part of development with a flat hierarchy. So, only because you do not have insight into all of that does not mean it is non existing.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
3) How about getting test server right, and reshaping dev procedures to default to deploying some feature-like sets of changes to testing first and waiting for at least 1-2 weeks? Like what TMW did years ago. It worked. It saved us a lot of trouble. Could it be back to this state of things? It worked much better for TMW earlier. What we currently have is big regression vs this state of thing. IMO its a high priority problem.
Already commented on this several times. Others might comment on it, it is not my forte.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
4) Try to be more responsible about features you ppl release. Show some support for your code/scripts/content and fix bugs that pop up in a timely manner. Some bugs are bad for gameplay. E.g. its innocent "unknown item" for you. Community wide it brings dumb questions to staff, player wide client lags if they pick that up and keep in inventory, traversing worstcase codepath looking up things that dont exist. Now popular battle now drops it. So ensure your content doesn't causes client warnings you dont understand BEFORE releasing it. Casual contributors can have excuses, I dont want it to be hard policies. But devs who wear formal badge are expected to more or less understand such ordeals. Maybe it could be something like "guideline"?
Bugs happen, bugs are taken care of as fast as possible.
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
5) When it comes to "game server admin" aspects now it looks to me like that: many @command only accessible to admins. Some things like server restart or password reset could only be done by admins, not to mention server debug (for server devs). And so on. Yet we dont really have admins who would act as part of "server team" on TMW in a manner I'll consider "efficient" and "workable"the way that makes our players happy. E.g. I'm yet to remember player who'd succeeded at password reset. Current state of things doesnt helps mentioned "tyrants" aspect I guess. Ofc there's no way to force someone to do something - but you can see where it gets us. I really want TMW - and our staff - to enjoy reputation better than that.
Dissagree. These commands are for a reason only in the hands of people deemed trustworthy enough. GMs already got quite some more power now than they had in the past.
I remember several cases of password resets that were successfull (8 requests were done and accepted by the web form over the last month alone, manual requests are dealt with on a best-effort-possible basis, but as account ownership is secured by email there is only so much that can be done in some cases) and i also remember scammers who constantly found ways to gain access to the game through old accounts they got hold of somehow and caused a lot of trouble.
And although you might not see it directly but some of the active server admins work their a* off to keeps things running and doing a quite good job with that (keep in mind that for many years TMWA is officially declared unmaintainable for reasons).
Hello=) wrote: ↑13 Dec 2022, 07:06
6) When few persons decide project future, take shortcuts or something by (almost) single handed decision(s), I wouldn't expect this to feel good on community heads. Not really worked for TMW. E.g. does someone remembers ManaServ, ManaSource and so on? Sure, devs had technically-correct ideas. But failed community aspects and died out as unused techs with empty servers and so on. Even if underlying techs were "better" in some aspects. Guess MMOs aren't about perfection, more like finding some sane balance. Personally I loved part where devs did game-wide meetings with players in "everyone invited" mode. Ofc a lot of noise, some chaos, plenty of time spent on this, and so on. Yet also a lot of fun, better understanding of each others, and overall I liked it. Now team apparently prefers very opposite direction. I take it as big regression vs old TMW dev style. IMO does no good to community and server "climate". Even if it pleases devs, price of devs convenience being high.
No impactful decisions are made single-handedly and the reasons why projects died are fare more complex than you like to to explain it here.
The rest is uninformed nonsense (e.g.: the next meeting of this kind is tomorrow and there will be more when there is need for it)