Topic

Are the Devs really being fair?

I understand it was way too easy for me to destroy entire islands before the switch, I get that.  I understand that's it's only fair to everyone to have balance so that people don't have to run around combating me just to be able to harvest goods.  Cool.  However, I really do feel like they pushed it way to far towards another extreme.  I was ok with it at first, I can poison two trees every 6 mins which amounts to about 50 planks and 20-25 earth every 6 mins, if I am dedicated to harvesting, however all it takes is one person to drop some antidote on my dying tree that I just spent money and time on and I still have to wait 6 mins before I can start the process over again, leaving empty handed and out of the money 1 jar of poison costs, also my mood has been wiped out.  This is obviously not fair.  If you don't see the frustration in this I'll make a point of the next test to follow around everyone trying to thin out bean trees and antidote them all, it's really bothersome.  I liked Zaphod's idea that poisoner's guilt shouldn't hit you until after a tree has died.  I hate to keep bringing this up but my game is based around a lumber company that can't get lumber except by finding the random spots that regenerate and by buying from other players.  What's going to happen when large amounts of planks and earth are needed for a project?  I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.  It should be balanced.  

Posted 20 months ago by Briar Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

Previous 1 2 3 4
  • Briar-It's interesting that you are choosing to focus on only one aspect of the game instead of letting all of the commodities have equal weight. I don't really have an answer to your question of "Is it fair" but I just thought your style of play was interesting. I think the best thing is to have balance in your play. Sure you are free to do things however you want, but the well rounded use of all the game aspects will probably give the maximum benefit to the maximum amount of people.
    Posted 20 months ago by Holly Waterfall Subscriber! | Permalink
  • At least one idea out there gives all states of a patch their turns at winning.  It's not necessarily a good idea.
    Posted 20 months ago by Tingly Claus Subscriber! | Permalink
  • briar, your game has been based around a lumber company for all of, what?

    2 .. 3 days?

    this is a testing phase. nothing is set in stone. though there do seem to be some constants in the game you need to know that the primary reason we are here is to test. and testing game balance is part of that.

    large amounts of planks and earth have been needed before poison even existed. we did just fine, thankyouverymuch.

    instead of deforesting entire islands, we got together community based "digging parties" to simultaneously dig patches in order to increase output and decrease the number of patches that needed to be maintained as "dirt holes".

    your massive deforestation practices essentially put an end to that community based harvesting practice.

    now you tell me, if you were a developer, what would be more important to you?

    A] a community based activity

    B] some random player's 3 day old lumber company
    Posted 20 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It's not a matter of fair vs non-fair, really: we are trying to balance: it's just doesn't happen on the first try (it'll go this way and that, back and forth, until we find a reasonable way for things to work).

    Personally, I love the idea of a lumber company and there are features in the pipeline to support this (both in the sense of wood trees being added to the game and, more importantly, groups which actually exist in the game, rather than just message boards & chat, so one could actually operate a business).
    Posted 20 months ago by stoot barfield Subscriber! | Permalink
  • One little thing, buried deep within Briar's post, is something I could get behind—not having guilt set in until a tree has died.
    Posted 20 months ago by Totter Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "wood trees being added to the game"
    THIS.

    Stoot has hit the nail on the head for a solution.
    Posted 20 months ago by Murri Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Briar

    I haven't got to the poisoning/antidote stuff yet, but I think you're providing exACTly what the devs need...  Stretching the limits and helping them find that balancing point.
    Posted 20 months ago by Pirate Apples Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I know there has been rather a lot of controversy over this but it is good for people to be creative and original. Some of the ideas coming out of it sound great :)
    Posted 20 months ago by Violet Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Is it unfair for you to have a more difficult time of inconveniencing other players? Hmmm, guess I have to think about that. Ok, thought about it. How about you cooperate with the people on the street projects, pay attention to what others have agreed on, and only cull where they suggest? For instance, I've seen suggestions of using deadend streets for lumber and loam. How quickly do you want to get rich? This is a pretty laid-back game, no real need to hurry. Your meditation ball and bubbly tea should help with the guilts.
    Posted 20 months ago by Phoebe Springback Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I sometimes get the sense that their is a contingent of players that expect everyone to play as one collective and follow that one group's rules. I personally love the creativity that Briar had to start a lumber company. Probably one of the most interesting things I've seen done in the game.

    Rather than kill that creative game play, I would prefer game dynamics that incentivize the community to maintain balance rather than dynamics that shackle gameplay.

    In this example, provide high exp and reward for replanting a tree that has been recently killed. Encourage the community to tend to the world and the balance will happen. Kill creativity and this game becomes another boring facebook game with no sustainable gameplay.

    Cheers to you Briar. Keep it up.
    Posted 20 months ago by en Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 to en.
    Posted 20 months ago by clare Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 to clare.
    Posted 20 months ago by Tingly Claus Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Is it fair of you to harvest a tree that someone took the time to create, then spent more time to water and nurture? Lets face it behind every tree someone put in effort and yet you see only your effort, your desires and your style of game play?

    I can agree with someone harvesting a tree they planted but to strip a whole area seems unfair, and as pointed out by others its unnecessary.

    It upset me to find Marlypole Mount had lost the tree I planted the day I first played Glitch, its gone so thats the end of it, but still from now on I'll tend my gaden trees and forgo planting elsewhere. at least until theres a chance trees will be allowed to grow.
    Posted 20 months ago by Faereluth Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "behind every tree, someone put in effort"   Does that then mean that they have some higher control over the use of those trees than other players?

     I pet, water, and harvest trees at random as I go through the game.   If it's on a public street, am I not supposed to do that?  Can only the people who live on a street interact with those trees? Or can the rest of us interact but not use the lumber?

    Are public trees public resources?  So that I can remove the cherry tree that was left on the street I live on, and replace it with a spice tree.  Does it fit your rules that only people who live on a street can decide that?  Why not plant trees for other people to use any way they like?

    This is a game with 10s of thousands of testers coming in.  How on earth are you going to limit their use of in-game resources? 

    Perhaps devs could create a Second Life type membership where people with enough money can rent the server space from Tiny Speck, and run their own neighborhoods under their own rules.   But don't expect everyone who plays to have the same world-view as yours on the public servers.
    Posted 20 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Is it fair of you to harvest a tree that someone took the time to create"

    unless it is in ones house I don't think it is fair for any one player to feel entitled to this sense of ownership in things taking place in the "world" at large. Even if the tree is right outside your home's front door it shouldn't be considered yours.

    btw, Faereluth, trees do die on their own. watch when a test opens after a long break for all the dead trees/plots.

    I'd love for building to create more of a sense of ownership and customization of an area, or being able to "lease" and "own" sections of the community gardens or something like that, but I don't see it coming to streets and trees.
    Posted 20 months ago by Another Chris Subscriber! | Permalink
  • If group lodges become available, perhaps the group could also create patches and garden plots that they controlled.  It could be part of the package that you acquire when you build the lodge.
    Posted 20 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • One thing for everyone to consider: since the reset (which happened before beta testing started), project requirements have been "dumbed down," so to speak.  Before the reset, projects required blocks, for example, which required blockmaking skills, which required blockmakers to be set up, which required currants and engineering skills, and so on.  After the reset, no one had any skills, so projects requirements were changed to much simpler things, like earth, barnacles, loam, etc., which require lower-level skills or none at all.  Now that players have reacquired better skills, I think we can expect to see a more typical mix of items and skills required at projects.

    So what does this mean for a lumber company?  Planks will still come up at a project once in a while, but not nearly as often as they do now.  Project participants will be able to fill the requirements the way they used to, before tree poison existed: tending patches, clearing trees which had died on their own, or going to a couple of spots where planks magically appear every few seconds. 

    Perhaps, in order to be fair to people who really enjoy deforestation, the guilt buff and mood penalties could be removed for people using poison in their own homes.  Purchase a home with five patches, plant, pet once, poison, clear, repeat... without penalties? 
    Posted 20 months ago by glum pudding Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It is great that people are specializing, I am myself. The problem people have with this is that Briar was just killing trees by the street, not picking one here and one over there. She also encouraged people to kill trees wantonly.

    There is a line between business and destruction and I am afraid it was crossed.


    @stoot, cant wait to see the new trees.
    Posted 20 months ago by Ani Laurel Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm not sure I see the problem with replanting street trees.  Is it really that hard or expensive? 
    Posted 20 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "...run their own neighborhoods under their own rules."

    I hope this will be implemented, but not in different 'realms'. One big world.

    Being able to segment geographical areas and apply rules against them would be awesome, and prevent a lot of the problems in this post, and future issues yet to be seen. I had some ideas in beta.glitch.com/forum/gener... in case anyone is interested.

    I'd love to be able to create Joe-Topia. I have a national anthem and flag designed already...but that's a long story.

    I'd also like to be neighbors with Faereluth :)
    Posted 20 months ago by Joe Blow Subscriber! | Permalink
  • What I was trying to say was that just because someeone wants to run a lumber company it gives him no greater right to the trees than any other.

    I was trying to point out that other people in game put effort into tending and nurturing the general trees, meaning everyone has the same right, the limber company does not have a greater right.

    What you suggest is nothing near what I meant. And I do miss seeing the tree I planted but heck some of us are just of a more gentler nature I guess.
    Posted 20 months ago by Faereluth Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Who owns the trees? (Other than Spriggan, maybe.)  I think many of us are developing a sense of ownership and place. But can I really say that, because I planted a spice tree, or because I watered a bean tree five times, that I have more say over what happens to it  when it lives in a public space than someone else?

    This is why we have houses available, isn't it? Maybe other options will show up as well.
    Posted 20 months ago by Lelu Subscriber! | Permalink
  • In testing you really need people focused on NOT playing fair. 

    Now my usual games are completely different from the culture of Glitch, but they give companies all of the necessary information to see game breaking bugs before launching/sending a feature to production. Now of course companies and real world regulators don't always listen to advice pointing out obvious issues, but it helps to have it out there.

    If you don't have mean, unpleasant testers, you go public with hidden bugs that will be exploited horribly in highly public ways. See Second Life's relationship with Something Awful.
    Posted 20 months ago by Catari Subscriber! | Permalink
  • The lumber company doesn't have a greater right.  That's why they can harvest exactly the same number of trees that other people plant.   

    Or are you suggesting that they have less rights and they should have to harvest fewer trees? 
    Posted 20 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • One problem that hasn't come up yet is if a houseguests poison your trees before you notice.
    Posted 20 months ago by Tingly Claus Subscriber! | Permalink
  • House guests, at the moment, are just a bad idea... but we could have the "only YOU can poison your house's trees" rule coupled with the "no penalties for poisoning your own house's trees" rule to eliminate that before it becomes an issue.

    Also, if we could purchase empty land, or empty land in conjunction with clubhouses, we could grow or kill whatever we wanted, with the above rules applying to either individuals or group members.
    Posted 20 months ago by glum pudding Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm not suggesting anything, nor am I going to argue my point.

    I'll just say this I would like the chance for there to be a few old venerable trees, ones that people feel are worthy to be spared the poison.
    Posted 20 months ago by Faereluth Subscriber! | Permalink
  • We are ready for the gated communities now, Stoot.
    Posted 20 months ago by clare Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think all of these problems can be solved if the amount of dirt needed for projects is drastically reduced: I typically get to projects where everything is fulfilled except for that, because it's the hardest commodity to get, and it takes seemingly forever for people to acquire the enormous amounts that are needed: the latest project had everything fulfilled except for 200-300 earth out of a total of 700 earth (with only 3 earth harvested per dig, and each dig making the patch unusable for some period of time)... The project could have been finished if not for everyone searching for a resource that was completely unavailable. This whole debate can be shut down by either requiring less of this extremely rare resource for each project, or making earth easier to obtain. It is frustrating for people working on projects, as well as everyone else (because it encourages mass killings of trees so the tiny amount of earth harvested for each patch can eventually add up to what is needed for a project).
    Posted 20 months ago by Shepherdmoon Subscriber! | Permalink
  • ah, clare, that made me laugh!
    Posted 20 months ago by Lelu Subscriber! | Permalink
  • stoot: I love the direction that you seem to be pushing this game in, and I'm excited to see what changes have happened in the next test.

    some of my ideas on this topic:

    I would love to see more players interacting in more dynamic ways apart from simply joining a group for a project to tunnel through to a goal. In-game "business" opportunities are an exciting idea, and I applaud Briar for her ingenuity to re-brand her goals into a creative outlet that others can participate in. She has created goals and mini-quests to the other players that she works with and seems to reward them handsomely. To me, the fact that some people don't agree with her mode of operations or motives, while others see it as unique and creative appears to mark the fact that her concept of game-play is exceptional.

    This past test was the first time in months that I have been closely aware of the life-span of trees. Before the test ended I nearly witnessed a tree die on a public street on its own from negligence (no petting or watering). I have never had an issue finding the things that I need in-game. Of course, like most, my purposes are different from that of some others.

    I like to find the fringe tricks in the game that seem to push the edges of what is possible. Some of these tricks might be bugs and some are just what I like to call "Gaming the System". Side note: I've found some interesting things having to do with Hell. ;). Briar seems to have created an interesting community dynamic that is obviously polarizing but pushes the system to an educational limit... some would call this a "teachable-moment". ;0

    I think there are a significant number of players that think that their method of game-play should be canonical and restrictions should be placed if necessary. I think that the greatest thing about Glitch is that a player can do the dumbest thing that they can imagine doing without any real ramifications. Many players forget that all that's really substantial from this game is the number of currents they have, their level of experience, their finger work-out from lots of clicking and their time and attention committed (the most valuable resource of all). Every player gives these things and some players give more than others.

    Balance is great. Fascism sucks. You're all playing it wrong anyways.
    Posted 20 months ago by Dr. Boss Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 to Dr. Boss
    Posted 20 months ago by Lord Bacon-o Subscriber! | Permalink
  • My comment was an effort to help the dev's find a way to make it more balanced. The initial numbers for everything are just a guess: it takes trial and error to find out what the best balance is, and right now the amount of dirt-type items to fulfill a project is way too high unless dirt is made easier to obtain.
    Posted 20 months ago by Shepherdmoon Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm actually loving the idea of no tree guilt in your own yard and actually the idea about the guilt not setting in until the tree is dead (good one, Briar). Those would probably continue to balance things out. It definitely does seem as if, during testing, some ought to be pushing the limits, I agree. By the way, I am not in favor of area tree clearing, not at all, but I agree that testing game limits makes sense, so that whole thing was interesting.

    I'm also in favor of changing the project requirements...but actually...and I saw this in a different thread, I think they should be a lot harder to complete. Not, believe me, not with more earth or planks per se...but with much, much larger numbers of resources...and a LOT more variety of them, too. They always want gas bean seeds...why not others? Same foods too: deluxe sammiches and choice crudites...why not whortleberry jelly (I just love that name) and barbecues or whatever? Different foods on every single one? Then you couldn't just carry around huge piles of parsnips and mushrooms and know you'd be able to pile on crudites whenever the projects come up, which I do sometimes. Would also give more weight to the cooking skills. And I think they ought to be more difficult partly because I want the devs to be able to keep up with us for one. But also, the projects have a frantic feel to them, where you can spend whole game days doing nothing else and thus not enjoying the rest of the scope of the game and "camping" under the vendors. If things took far longer, you'd be able to check in less often. And I think making them harder might mean people would cooperate more on them, more patch/barnacle/jellisac parties. Also...I wish the projects needed those blocks! lol I got those skills and made a few blocks and keep looking for projects that want them:)
    Posted 20 months ago by RM Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Shepardmoon, the project requirements have little to do with this. we've had similar, even higher, requirements before. we didn't need lumber companies or deforestation.

    at the time, the community debated this civilly, and generally speaking "builders" only "locked out" planters from areas immediately surrounding projects, by keeping the plots dug. that isn't "collectivism", it is "compromise", and allows for as many styles of gameplay as possible.

    I find windborn's "logic" bizarre. poisoners rely on planters to have something to poison. planters do not rely on poisoners to be able to plant. this essential difference is important.

    as for briar's "experimental gameplay" I thought it was awesome and useful. it was useful in that, as a result, poison got balanced.

    complaining about the fairness of this, after the fact, is a bit much.
    Posted 20 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Project speed bumps are needed, since people can really easily fly through them, especially with copious quantities of pork and/or no-no. They just need to be better designed so that people feel like they're doing something, instead of sitting waiting for huge quantities of earth that's hard to produce but also likely lurking somewhere in someone's house or pack. 

    Dragging 4 or 5 people to do circuits on levensome wouldn't be that bad but for the ever present fear that someone will just silently drop the few hundred earths left and the project will be over before people get back.
    Posted 20 months ago by Catari Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I am reminded about the discussion about mining. Who owns the rock? Are you supposed to share? Is it a best practice to mine until it's gone? etc. Then there's the overpopulation thread with wall to wall pigs on Marylpole Mount, butterfly gardens and lag. Don't forget the lashing that many have taken because they didn't follow barnacle scraping mores. 

    So now, we have different pieces of the economy--dirt and planks. And a new set of disagreements. This is the thing I like best about Glitch--I get to study the anthropology. I am most encouraged that there is a diversity of playing goals, playing styles and playing politics. The disagreements are my favorite parts. It takes alot of heat to make a walloping diamond, you know.  
    Posted 20 months ago by Mac Rapalicious Subscriber! | Permalink
  • dr. boss, come on.

    there's ingenuity and then there is pursuing in game objectives that aim to shut down other people's gameplay styles entirely, by clear-cutting the world out from under them.

    doing this in a creative way is interesting in the short term, sure, but long term it needs limits so that "ingenious" players don't bully every other gameplay style out of the world.
    Posted 20 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Mac Rap, rocks are different as they spontaneously re-spawn.

    I don't think destroying trees can be compared to mining rocks. Behaviors of the objects just too dissimilar.
    Posted 20 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm not sure a wood tree is the solution unless plank spawning suddenly disappears from the game.  I think Peat Mastery should grant a decent chance of getting loam or dirt from peat bogs when you harvest those things.  If you want to keep certain dirt plots clear, then perhaps one should consider depositing notes to that effect at those dirt plots.  I mean, I assume that's why there's a Penmanship skill...

    All this is, of course, if you want to keep things all civil and such. Nothing like a little conflict to keep a game interesting and having a clash between clear cutters and tree huggers could be entertaining and a great way to siphon currants out of the economy.
    Posted 20 months ago by Blitz Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Stri, I am talking about the economy, politics and culture. No reason to dismiss my points because you find a fault in a small part of the analogy. just sayin
    Posted 20 months ago by Mac Rapalicious Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Mac, I did not disagree with your points.

    it is simply true that rocks and trees behave differently and are difficult to compare because of this.

    that's all I said in relation to your comment.
    Posted 20 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • planters do not rely on poisoners to be able to plant. this essential difference is important.

    In every part of Glitch except new street projects, you must poison trees in order to plant new ones.

    Trees don't respawn but there is an in-game way for players to replant them.  As far as I know, there isn't any in-game mechanism for players to replace mined-out rocks.
    Posted 20 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • So, I think what needs to be done for the projects is to monitor how quickly each item gets filled up, and tweak the numbers for each so they are more balanced: if it's really super easy for people to get peat, and that fills up right away, but it's really super hard for people to get earth, so that is always holding up the project, then each project should require more peat but less earth (as an example)... there should always be an opportunity for more people to participate by making each commodity required balanced according to its difficulty to acquire.
    Posted 20 months ago by Shepherdmoon Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @WindBorn, trees can die from neglect.  Poison is not the sole cause of tree death.
    Posted 20 months ago by Lelu Subscriber! | Permalink
  • shepherd your metrics probably get the difficulty inverted.

    Things that are a pain to get end up being hoarded and then dumped all at once - barnacle talc, peat... Things that really can be gathered in a reasonable length of time are more likely to have longer average times than those that are hard - plops are easy to produce and hard to hoard, moonstones are either hoarded or acquired via auctions not produced in real time.
    Posted 20 months ago by Catari Subscriber! | Permalink
  • windborn, that is incorrect.

    first off, new streets are a GREAT source of new patches. essentially every tree in glitch has been planted in a patch created this way.

    secondly, yes, if a tree fills a patch, poison is needed to plant a new one. problem is, the new tree will be no more productive than the old tree. once an area is organized for long term production, or player behavior has adapted to the tree distribution, poison isn't necessary.

    thirdly, players don't need to re-plant rocks because of their respawn. not sure what you're getting at there.
    Posted 20 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Hmm now where have i seen the "semantics game" played so many times before ? ah you know, where we just  change the words/descriptions of distasteful/questionable actions & behaviors to ones more likely to be "socially acceptable",,,,,such as from "execute" to "cleanse", from "cult leader"(not my words..) to "CEO"..from "Tree Killers" to "Lumber Co.". a Limited Liability Company/Corporation, of course, and my personal fav...from "death dealer" to "employee".......yeah...right....of course we are.....lololololol..............
    Posted 20 months ago by SavannaBlueRose Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +100 Dr Boss.
    Posted 20 months ago by en Subscriber! | Permalink
  • This is my first time as a tester. I find this whole discussion really interesting. I'm going to spend some time pondering ways to test the limits. Hats off to Briar, though clear cutting wouldn't be my style, I too appreciate her creative thinking.

    One point: though I appreciate the kind hearted feelings toward trees and pigs and such, learning more meditation skills might be advised. In a game like this it's better to develop a certain detachment. 
    Posted 20 months ago by Riverwalker Subscriber! | Permalink
Previous 1 2 3 4