Jump to content


Photo

Why The Irony?


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 EvilDognapot

EvilDognapot
  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 10:28 PM

Someone else mentioned the irony of "solo" Nightmist, being much the opposite of name, and the inferred irony of it, but why do we accept it? What are the goals of a solo server that is heavily geared in the opposite direction of solo play? Furthermore, why do we accept it?

Most of us who are still around made our bones on the main server, and are used to the typical escalation = progress mentality of Nightmist's development, but if we've learned anything from the main server it is that opposite has proven to be true.

I can tell you now that more alts will doom this game, just like it doomed Nightmist. Don't go there. You can keep it at 2 but to really encourage team work, make it 1. I don't think the realms layout and the design of the various classes will work for that though.


Hi Pandilex, I was never overly fond of alts either but they were there for a reason. We needed alts to do anything in the game, thus our collection of alts was a meter of the games requirements. You can actually chart the escalation and increased alt use over time with addition of new areas, we saw alt use go up and up, but teamwork stayed the same.

In the 1alt server the emphasis is obviously on teamwork, but has the structure been truely helpful or not? Everybody goes into a handful of clans primarily to play the game in a way that's closer to its multi-alt design, or for the great protection that current alliances afford them. This facilitates teamwork, but puts a clan into a greater position than the multi-server ever saw.

In this current scenario, clans provide the power where alts were previously used, but should clans hold that specific power? I've been in two clans because of the friends that were already in them, but if I had no friends I would have wound up in the same place. If Nightmist experiences an influx of players again, the momentum for current clans would be unstoppable, whereas now one or two players in clan becoming inactive is all that's needed for it to fail. I like my clan, but I think we all also appreciate playing the game as we wish when groups aren't available.

So how do we transfer a player's freedom to play the game from the two clans, and into individual players? We have a vast expanse of land in the world of Nightmist that is unnaproachable by the levels who they were designed for. You can't hardly enter some of the guilds your level requires some of the time, so perhaps the creatures that reside in these areas should be modified to be a fair challenge to the levels they were designed to interact with.

On the multi server, level was not the primary determiner of what you could do and where you could go, so in new areas alts were considered instead. We don't have alts on the 1a server, the premise of NM's geography is not in agreement with the playerbase anymore. In your clan you can count on seeing at least one other person online, but you should be able to advance at some reasonable pace without networking and organizational skills.

I'm not saying that this is the best way to address balancing the 1a server, but I do believe that alts needs to reformulated into levels, since the level of a character has replaced alts in defining the ability a player has to do something in this game.
Evil report carries further than any applause

#2 Throwback

Throwback
  • Members
  • 1248 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 10:36 PM

You can't blame map layouts and monster difficulty for clans being powerful. Like you said when 1 or 2 people quit a clan faulters. KNOWLEDGE is the power. The clans with Pros in it are successful. When they go away, the bosses go away thus the members find a new person to drag em around.

Vegas 1a....formerly known as Memphis
¨¨*(^.^)·:*¨¨

#3 Trevayne

Trevayne
  • Advisors
  • 1841 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 11:46 PM

You seem to be under the delusion that the 1a server was designed for solo play. Let me show you the major flaws in that belief:

1) The 1a server was not designed. It was copied. There was absolutely no thought given to how players would use this gameworld with only one character. No thought was given to balancing the classes for single-character play, or to the monster-character balance. It's had a few fixes in the last 9 months, but it's still basically an awkward copy of the multi server.

2) The 1a server is intended for cooperative play, not solo play. Every time staff have given JLH the choice between moving the game more toward something that can be accomplished individually vs. something that would require cooperation, he has instructed us to favor cooperation. That's why you ended up with the KTP system (to encourage people to train together rather than gate train) and why the coliseum bosses were adapted for leveling (to require help in obtaining tokens to level). I think one of the reasons that he opened the 1a server in the first place was that on the multi server everyone was effectively playing solo... people could do everything in game without interacting with any players at all.
Aeryn and Trevayne in game.

#4 Angelus

Angelus
  • Members
  • 1202 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 11:58 PM

The problem that now possible occurs is that it becomes a spiral where you train to become someone. Can't find people to do stuff with, and by the time other people have started lvling. Tthe first batch of ppl have left or gone severely inactive.

Which u never get out of if u focus so much on team play when there is no team to play with.

Edited by Angelus, 29 November 2007 - 11:58 PM.

Angelus ingame.
Back into the shadows once again...

#5 Trevayne

Trevayne
  • Advisors
  • 1841 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 12:02 AM

Some of you also seem to believe that I thought the 1a server was a good idea. Completely untrue.
Aeryn and Trevayne in game.

#6 Angelus

Angelus
  • Members
  • 1202 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 12:21 AM

Actually I don't even really know who you are, no offense tho. I still like it way better then multi. Its more relaxed then running around on 20 alts. Just needs a bit bigger pbase.
Angelus ingame.
Back into the shadows once again...

#7 Freek

Freek
  • Members
  • 1200 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 12:25 AM

Corey/Trev pretty much nailed it on the head.

Corey - "The clans with pros in them succed and when they go inacivte, others leave to find someone else to drag them around"

Seen this happen a few times. Recently I was inactive (After rob had already left for his year+ trip)/(IRL stuff CBA'D with NM) come back 5-7 people left. Saying "Blah blah none does anything anymore" so they ran to another clan who in the moment were doing stuff.

Trevayne - "think one of the reasons that he opened the 1a server in the first place was that on the multi server everyone was effectively playing solo... people could do everything in game without interacting with any players at all."

Yep. I was one of those players you know 20+ archs etc. Run around kill whatever boss was in and log. 1a makes it challenging to get what ever it is you want. Lvling a crit to 30 solo really isnt much of a problem if you know where that class excels. This way 1 person whos on all day and spends countless hours on nm (i know a few) Can't do everything without anyone unless they have there friends/allys on. I personally Like the way the players made clans affect the game so much on the 1a server. Except the fact that the noobs clan hop get what they want from one then leave for another. (I know a few of them too)

The only way I see alts being a good thing to go back to is if Main went back to how it was (pkable) and then was reset. Thats just my opinon, my-self prolly wont play main unless its a quest and no one is on 1a.
Freek ingame.

#8 EvilDognapot

EvilDognapot
  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 04:45 AM

You seem to be under the delusion that the 1a server was designed for solo play. Let me show you the major flaws in that belief:

1) The 1a server was not designed. It was copied. There was absolutely no thought given to how players would use this gameworld with only one character. No thought was given to balancing the classes for single-character play, or to the monster-character balance. It's had a few fixes in the last 9 months, but it's still basically an awkward copy of the multi server.

2) The 1a server is intended for cooperative play, not solo play. Every time staff have given JLH the choice between moving the game more toward something that can be accomplished individually vs. something that would require cooperation, he has instructed us to favor cooperation. That's why you ended up with the KTP system (to encourage people to train together rather than gate train) and why the coliseum bosses were adapted for leveling (to require help in obtaining tokens to level). I think one of the reasons that he opened the 1a server in the first place was that on the multi server everyone was effectively playing solo... people could do everything in game without interacting with any players at all.


You misinterpret me. I'm suggesting that proper balancing should focus on levels the same way the main server focused on alts. If an area in main was the best place for 10-20 then it should be altered to benefit that level in a reasonable manner for 1a. I'm not saying that this should be totally solo'd but that aspect of 1a should exist; especially considering the weaknesses in the playerbase right now. This is because, as you stated, the server was copied.

Secondly, now that we know how the playerbase has reacted to the copy, we should use that knowledge to move in the right direction. I'm not blaming the map for clans being powerful, I'm merely stating that clans are the only thing in the game that makes the map playable for most people and the fact there's really only two or three of them puts too much control into one institution.

Trevayne, I sometimes don't know if you're arguing against something or advocating apathy when we post in the same threads. If it's the former, good for you, debate and discussion are the same to me, if it's the latter then I would certainly re-evaluate my role in the game were our places exchanged. I had just as much reason to be apathetic about NM's prospects back when you still had reason to be optimistic about Draco Honoris, and I'm not even responsible for anything.
Evil report carries further than any applause

#9 Trevayne

Trevayne
  • Advisors
  • 1841 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 06:31 AM

Hmm... you're right. My two points were a little unclear. Let me clarify.

The current 1-a server is designed for cooperative, single character play. You seem to want a system designed for solo play, which is a completely different thing. JLH has been making decisions that indicate that he doesn't want a solo play game... he wants a cooperative play game. I do however agree with you that a solo play game would be much more appropriate with such a small playerbase.

As far as re-balancing the 1a server, I'm not sure it's possible. We have a world where everything in it, from the game engine to the class abilities to the monster stats to the area design, everything was built for a very different style of gameplay. We've tried hard for the last few months to bring some balance to this, but it's like taking an old copy of Zork and trying to rebuild it to play Halo.

I've mostly stopped dealing with balance issues on 1a because I honestly don't see a good way to make it work at this point. Fixing it would require extensive effort from JLH, and he just doesn't really have the time to do that at this point. I'm focusing my efforts on multi for now, which is what I really enjoy. Some of the other staff are focusing on 1a though, but realize that their ability to change many things in game are very limited.

I also appreciate the good debate. Thanks for posting.
Aeryn and Trevayne in game.

#10 Gaddy

Gaddy
  • Advisors
  • 5244 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 06:36 AM

I think you mis-understand him here Doggy.

At least for me, 1-alt doesn't appeal as a game to try to fix and design for over and over.
REAL balancing and fixing of the game would require highly active administrators, and it takes a ton of time with things that no one likes---things people will gripe at us and make the server suck even more for us. (IE- making it harder to level, harder to get gold, etc)

Nightmist multi has been developed and designed for the system at hand, not for a 1-alt game.
It would be easier to start from scratch than to fix Nightmist's system to fit as a 1-alt game.
Wisdom is the principle thing. Therefore, get wisdom, and in all your getting, get understanding.
-Proverbs 4:7

#11 Freek

Freek
  • Members
  • 1200 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 12:32 PM

1a as of now really don't have many problems besides some of the advantages of some classes over others. (Mainly how fast some classes get stam and have way more then others)
Some of the ktp bosses need to be a little worked on but thats about it. On 1a you get extra stam hp/mp when you lvl past 30. So having lets say 13lvl 31's-35's (depending on class where you get your stam) would = about the 20 archs on main. Meaning when 13 people get to lvl 31-35 and agree to work together new stuff.

Freek ingame.

#12 EvilDognapot

EvilDognapot
  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 02:25 PM

it's like taking an old copy of Zork and trying to rebuild it to play Halo.


I know, but it's also what we have. Period. No matter how stupid something is, NM doesn't go backwards. PK restrictions are still on a trial basis, remember? If it doesn't work then we can change it back to "kill anything over lvl 5". Well, now that we've migrated to the ProgressQuest system on main I believe we've proven some points on that issue. However we won't move back.

Now this is also in response to Gaddy. What we have is essentially a malformed 1a server, but keep in mind that in 2002 NM was solo-able. Stamina regeneration worked differently, hit 'n' run training was a usefull tactic, the bosses (minus SK and CG) were managable by small parties, travel was travel and not a gauntlet of 8 dragging monsters on each square, and gold training was an option (however somewhat controversial). A large part of this thread is pointing out the differences between level and alts, some of the characteristics of 2002 NM were changed because of alts, now that we don't have alts, it might make sense to consider whether they are necessary or not.
Evil report carries further than any applause

#13 Trevayne

Trevayne
  • Advisors
  • 1841 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 05:17 PM

I know, but it's also what we have. Period. No matter how stupid something is, NM doesn't go backwards.

Absolutely, sadly, true.

When the 1a server opened, I advocated closing off a large number of areas from the game... basically shutting down everything that had been added since about 2003 including everthing connected to Harabec, Faravar, Tirantek, the land of the dead, and more. This would have closed off some of the most popular areas but would have given us a chance to rebuild, restructure, and maybe rebalance some of the game.

Sadly, that proposal was shot down. Once something gets released, it's almost impossible to take it back. If people want there to be change, they have to be willing to accept the idea that they might have to sacrifice some of what they enjoy. That never seems to have worked on Nightmist. For now, the best that I can see to do is to be extremely cautious about releasing changes (which we were not with the opening of 1a) and to find the few small ways that we can try to shape how things work. Believe me, nobody is more frustrated with that than I am.
Aeryn and Trevayne in game.

#14 EvilDognapot

EvilDognapot
  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 10:27 PM

Then perhaps simply working outward from the center of NM, much like the map had progressed in the main server. The bigger things on my list would include dragging, monster damage, and boss health in the 2003 and earlier areas. Outside of that I would be more careful, but in pre 2003 areas, we know what it was like and how it worked back then. Perhaps let 31+ crowd tackle the rest since they're more powerful per crit? That's the only grey area I see, I think after the Spider King, things became more typically alt oriented.
Evil report carries further than any applause

#15 Gaddy

Gaddy
  • Advisors
  • 5244 posts

Posted 02 December 2007 - 12:46 AM

How do you restructure the entire game now?
I mean, to really adjust everything would give players at high level now complete domination, but to reset the server would piss off everyone so much that they would be likely to just never play again.

And I completely understand where they're coming from; no one wants to have wasted days upon days of working at a game.
Wisdom is the principle thing. Therefore, get wisdom, and in all your getting, get understanding.
-Proverbs 4:7

#16 EvilDognapot

EvilDognapot
  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 02 December 2007 - 01:47 AM

That's why you would want to start by changing the places that high lvls don't use, like the 2003 and earlier areas. My basic argument is that pre 2003 people opted to play much like they're forced to play now, so that's the basic model. For everything post 2003 more consideration would be needed.

I mean, just keeping monsters from dragging would go a long ways.
Evil report carries further than any applause

#17 Freek

Freek
  • Members
  • 1200 posts

Posted 02 December 2007 - 02:06 AM

How do you restructure the entire game now?
I mean, to really adjust everything would give players at high level now complete domination, but to reset the server would piss off everyone so much that they would be likely to just never play again.

And I completely understand where they're coming from; no one wants to have wasted days upon days of working at a game.


Save the playerbase reset the main!.

As for solo alt go's I told you I thought the only rong with it atm is where some classes get stam and others dont. Eventually when people get lvl 35's and such you will be able to do what you did on main with 20 archs with half the almount. And dont say 35 is impossible 2 people are real close.. Would be red but zz.

Freek ingame.

#18 Gnarkill

Gnarkill

    Antisocial

  • Members
  • 1834 posts

Posted 04 December 2007 - 07:05 PM

1a's main problem is everyone (even people who had little on multi) brought theier "Multi Egos" with them... If you want a community based on teamwork the players have to be able to put aside all the petty little things if they wanna be able to accomplish anything on there.

When a top 5 ranked clan ignores atleast 3 of its users with mages that need AoP in order for the couple high lvls to boost thier egos by leveling faster then others of course people are gonna leave and noones gonna wanna help that clan. Then people move or get angry at the clan/clans they were in for actually not helping when they promised that to begin with.

Nm's playerbase isn't ready for a "cooperative gameplay" server ..log on 1a on a low lvl and ask around for help... you'll see 1/10 people will most likely help you the rest will do the same thing we all did with our arrogant egos on mutli and tell them to "stfu" or "go dai".

and its not the multi kids' fault that this was even brought up so why propose "reset multi" when they've worked hard for what they got and everyone on there seems to work well together or atleast stay out of eachothers way.

Stop whining and just play ffs..with the tiny playerbase and all the whining we are lucky JLH even keeps the server up. I mean if all you're gonna do is complain why do you even play? there are other games out there that DO base themself as solo play....

Edited by Gnarkill, 04 December 2007 - 07:08 PM.

Gnarkill- Multi and 1a


#19 Throwback

Throwback
  • Members
  • 1248 posts

Posted 05 December 2007 - 12:54 AM

[color=#FF0000]
When a top 5 ranked clan ignores atleast 3 of its users with mages that need AoP in order for the couple high lvls to boost thier egos by leveling faster then others of course people are gonna leave and noones gonna wanna help that clan. Then people move or get angry at the clan/clans they were in for actually not helping when they promised that to begin with.
color]


seems how you brought it up dj, AoP on 1a requires 10+ ppl and at least 2 ppl on clerics(must be skilled as well). Tyler bitched and bitched and bitched and bitched some more for AoP when 1) we did not have enough active members on to run a trip for him WHILE he was on 2) he had an arch cleric he couldn't use simply because he wasn't skilled and 3)Jordan and Alex are the only clan members to have run it, I'm sure I could if I got a map but ffs, death traps? Why would I risk everyone's exp simply because TYLER is a cry baby. TYVM

Vegas 1a....formerly known as Memphis
¨¨*(^.^)·:*¨¨

#20 Freek

Freek
  • Members
  • 1200 posts

Posted 05 December 2007 - 01:11 AM

1a's main problem is everyone (even people who had little on multi) brought theier "Multi Egos" with them... If you want a community based on teamwork the players have to be able to put aside all the petty little things if they wanna be able to accomplish anything on there.


So blame multi for the reason 1a is so jacked up. If people wouldn't of been so gay on mutli then they wouldn't of carried it over to 1a.

And i'm was saying about the quote "reset main". 1.) joke wont happen to many people be pissed off. 2.) Only way to save it imo!

Freek ingame.

#21 Gnarkill

Gnarkill

    Antisocial

  • Members
  • 1834 posts

Posted 05 December 2007 - 01:38 AM

Cor I was in clan with a mage so why assume I was talking about Tyler I was also in other top 5 clans when there were mages in them so why assume I was even talking about MD??

/t freek I blame it on the people not on multi.. I got along with quite a few on 1a that I never did on multi simply because it was good to work together.

Edited by Gnarkill, 05 December 2007 - 01:41 AM.

Gnarkill- Multi and 1a





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users