A Shady Goblin (Ring Roll) in Warsilk Woods

[Senescant]

Part of what Cylock quoted and imo gave validity to was that many players rarely if at all come to the forums and "Cant really hold them to "but everyone here agreed" if the agreement was made before they logged in, and they weren't part of the conversation." He took Diamondfist's entire post and his first words were "You're correct".

While I want this to be fair, organized and civil. But I don't think you're being fair to everyone by telling a decent minority of people that they cannot play the game they want to play it either when no one has come out and said they cannot do it that way. That's what's driving me to make this fun and fair for everyone, because right now I still believe that it's not. I think finding the right balance and compromise that everyone is happy with should be the end goal, not just making everything "100% fair".

Let us both continue to try and make this enjoyable for everyone. Maybe after a short time everyone who's staunchly in favor of clicking will have moved on. But I don't think strong arming or cyber bullying anyone into playing a game a certain way is what's best, regardless of what side you're on. No changes need to be made today if we all agree. I just want to be fair to a portion of the population that wants to do this quest a different way, not the one standing in their way.

Also thank you for your continued feedback/support Loramin. If we had more people coming forward with their thoughts and ideas (or just one green name laying some authority on the matter) I think we'd have this wrapped up nice and quick.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Part of what Cylock quoted and imo gave validity to was that many players rarely if at all come to the forums and "Cant really hold them to "but everyone here agreed" if the agreement was made before they logged in, and they weren't part of the conversation." He took Diamondfist's entire post and his first words were "You're correct".

Right, so let's look at that Diamondfist post shall we? I'll separate every possible statement Cylock could have been referring to when he said "You're correct" ... but of course he never clarified which one (or more) of those statements he was actually agreeing with:

Originally Posted by diamondfist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The bearer of entry is lowered when the timer is exact on mobs like this and scout.

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Its lowered even more when it becomes a roll.

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

having 20-80 people show up on timed intervals to roll dice at a chance of loot doesnt feel classic at all.

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

As I mentioned in another thread staff could get creative with ways of not only breaking this up, but also punishing those who are breaking the rules by using autofire as a means to secure their turn ins. (https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=132)

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The other option is to really really fuck with variance and or spawn location (this isnt classic, but we do have unclassic things here already)

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If this 24 hour mob had a variance more like 12 hours - 36? 48? hours you would set the bearer of entry back to what it was on live after the initial rush of neckbeards power gaming their way through the shitty windows.

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

(this would most likely take a few months)

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

after that you may actually find people logging in to randomly find it up like live...

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You would actually have to ask around to find the timers for last spawn and do work...

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

instead of just showing up at an exact x time, or x time +/- a few hours

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Which is a simple repetitive action. Scout rolls which have been established for a long time show how this plays out exactly.

In other words, the entirety of your argument that Cylock supports clickfests boils down to you assuming that he was agreeing with this one piece out of eleven from that post:

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

having 20-80 people show up on timed intervals to roll dice at a chance of loot doesnt feel classic at all.

And even if that one statement, out of the eleven, was really the one Cylock was agreeing to, that STILL doesn't say we should have clickfests because a couple of losers think they can win faster by cheating with autofire! Again, lost of things on P99 don't "feel" classic, and again rolls suck and definitely don't feel classic ... but they're still the least worst option, and anyone with a brain sees as much (we've had literally hundreds of Scout rolls involving tons of people, where everyone all saw eye to eye on that exact issue)

But given the context of Cylock's post, where he literally talks about getting Nilbog to add variance, it seems far, far more likely he was referring to this bit:

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The other option is to really really fuck with variance and or spawn location (this isnt classic, but we do have unclassic things here already)

Look, it really feels like you've been talked into a position of trying to make everyone happy all of the time. That's noble, but it's also impossible. And cherry-picking just one point out of eleven and using it to argue that Cylock supports you doesn't make it any more possible.

Everyone, including you, has worked very hard to make this roll happen. Scout roll took months (years?), and we got everyone to agree on Shady by the third spawn ever on P99, and the agreement has not been broken once. That's awesome, that's incredible, that's worthy of celebration!

By trying to make everyone happy all the time you seriously risk destroying all that. You, of all people, should understand just how hard it is to get everyone to agree to anything. A straight roll within seconds of the spawn is literally the simplest option possible (besides clickfests). It's also the most obvious "least bad option" ... and it was still incredibly hard to make happen!

Any further changes risk ending our beautiful simple agreement. Plus, even if you could make them without breaking the current agreement, they're not worth making: scout doesn't have off days where people autofire their way into a Talisman of Benevolence, and Shady doesn't need them either.

[Para99]

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ok, to appease everyone. I'm proposing we try something new for a week. Monday through Friday (US Eastern Time, based on assumed window start of 21h after turn in) will be clicks while Saturday and Sunday can be pre-rolls (casuals are usually busy neckbearding shit like jobs mon-fri). Or maybe switch it, but many people have let me know they're still in favor of clicking and most people that are in favor of rolling would rather preroll.

I have no intention of doing this quest any time in the near future even if the timer is fixed so take my opinion with a grain of salt, but two different systems will be much harder for both players and GM's to enforce, especially once the timer lands on prime time during the week.Nothing on this server appeases everyone. Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In another thread Nilbog said he wasn't aware the variance was unclassic, and that he'd fix it if it was. Several people then chimed in with evidence, so there is hope for a fix.

I was one of those people [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Posted that before your thread.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Para99 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I was one of those people [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Posted that before your thread.

Thank you!

[Senescant]

I think a large chunk of the issue the anti roll people have is that they are "competitively poopsocking" a window to have to roll. It's very anticlimactic and imo a waste of lots of people's time. I think if you're going to roll it should go all the way to a pre-window roll until variance is removed. If you're going to roll just roll.

If some people want to click today I will not stand in their way. For something that isn't a set rule I don't think its fair to tell people they have to play one way or the other when things haven't been set in stone. I think some balance can be found. We've altered the agreement based on feedback so far. I don't see why the agreement we've set forth cannot continue to be massaged to a point where more people are happy with it. There's room for everyone under this agreement with the current shady situation.

Cya there Loramin.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

For something that isn't a set rule

It IS a set rule: that's the entire thing you and everyone else has been working for this entire time! Or to be more accurate, the rule is that you can't break player agreements, and what we've worked so incredibly hard for up to this point was to establish a player agreement

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't think its fair to tell people they have to play one way or the other when things haven't been set in stone. I think some balance can be found.

You've done a complete 180 here, and I feel like you're trying to backstab the entire Shady community with this. Before you were actively organizing everyone to set things in stone, and now after several days of 20+ players all agreeing to the same player agreement, you want to pretend there's no agreement?

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

We've altered the agreement based on feedback so far.

Not really. The only thing that changed was the number of seconds after the spawn before people rolled. Otherwise it is the exact same agreement as Scout, and has been since the beginning; only the number of seconds changed, and that had to change because Shady has variance and Scout doesn't.

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't see why the agreement we've set forth cannot continue to be massaged to a point where more people are happy with it. There's room for everyone under this agreement with the current shady situation.

No, there is not. You cannot make all the people happy all the time. It's almost like some incredibly famous president said as much.

The anti-social low lifes will NEVER be happy. If you somehow setup certain "click days", they will not be happy with them: they will want to click every day. And I guarantee that if you really push that angle the best you will do is destroy the entire agreement and create a constant clickfest for everyone. THAT is why I am fighting you so incredibly hard on this. A day or two of clicks won't ruin my world, but if you destroy this agreement we are all fucked, and it will be a million times harder to establish a new one. At best it will take months (and during those months Shady will be a pure clickfest). At worst we'll never again get Shady to be a roll.

Here's what I don't understand: after literally being the person who worked the hardest, and saw exactly how impossible it was to get twenty P99ers in-game (plus however many forum goers who just like to weigh in with opinions even though they aren't rolling) to agree on ANYTHING ... how can you possibly delude yourself into thinking that you could even change the roll from /random 1000 to /random 2000, let alone turn roll days into click days, and still get 100% consensus from all twenty people (not the same people every day ... and plus the forum also)? I mean, even if you hadn't seen anything else, just watching Siryado and seeing how hard it was to get one person to agree to what 19 others already agreed to, every day for these past few days, should have taught you something.

Did you not notice what a massive failure it was when someone tried to set a fixed time for the roll, even though everyone would likely agree that's an easier and sane way to do things? If the better (but more complex) agreement failed, what chance does an inferior (but also more complex) agreement that gives in to the cheaters a certain number of days a week have? Anyone who is familiar with Scout will be against it, because Scout has gone on for far longer without any issue, despite never having "click days".

The current player agreement is awesome: it is almost exactly like the very successful simple/existing Scout agreement, but adjusted for Shady, and we the P99 community made it happen far faster. It's almost like we learned a lesson, or some of us did at least, from the Scout experience.

Everyone follows to the current agreement (not 2/3rd, everyone). Everyone has agreed to it for several days now. It was nearly impossible to get set, and as a result it will be even more impossible to change it. If you, or anyone else, tries to change it you will fail, at best, and at worst you will destroy the entire agreement. But you will never, I repeat, never, make everyone happy.

[Senescant]

I'm saying that 100% of people agreeing to roll because that's what WE'VE told them to do is different than people agreeing that shady should be handled by a roll. The people who want to click have made great compromises and concessions for the people that want to roll so that the pro-roll crowd can do shady as they want. Mostly because they were bullied into doing so by some of the people there, including me at one point. I'm ashamed that I used such tactics to try and bring people over to my side of thinking. There's a different between agreeing with someone and just going along with someone.

People, like agreements, should be flexible and should be allowed to change when presented with new/more/different ideas or opinions. We shouldn't be so rigid that seven instances of something that will happen hundreds or thousands of times over the life of the server should set the standard for everyone to follow.

If we who want to roll are not willing to make some of those exact same compromises how can be claim to be any better than they are? If we are to be champions for the people, should we not be champions for ALL of the people? Even when our views differ from theirs?

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm saying that 100% of people agreeing to roll because that's what WE'VE told them to do is different than people agreeing that shady should be handled by a roll. The people who want to click have made great compromises and concessions for the people that want to roll so that the pro-roll crowd can do shady as they want. Mostly because they were bullied into doing so by some of the people there, including me at one point. I'm ashamed that I used such tactics to try and bring people over to my side of thinking. There's a different between agreeing with someone and just going along with someone.

You're 100% correct: like I said, it's almost as if it's impossible to make all the people happy all the time. It is noble to hear and listen to everyone's opinion, but not all opinions are right. If you truly don't believe that, please write me a one page essay on how the Saudi Arabian Prince's opinion that it was ok to brutally murder that Khasheegi guy was actually correct [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Again, there is nothing different between Shady and Scout except variance. For MONTHS now everyone has agreed to roll on Scout (in much larger groups than at the Shady roll). Does that mean that every last person on P99 is happy with the Scout roll? OF COURSE NOT! Virtually every time anyone posts about Scout someone (or multiple someones) in the forums chime in about how the roll sucks.

But that does not mean we should throw out the Scout roll! It doesn't even mean we should alter it. I'll keep repeating it until you get it: this is not just an "everyone is right" situation. Rolls are objectively more fair. If they weren't, you would never have everyone agreeing to them, with Shady or with Scout.

In fact:

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm saying that 100% of people agreeing to roll because that's what WE'VE told them

I don't think you meant it this way, but there's a level of egotism in that statement. Like all those people at every Scout roll (we're talking about literally hundreds of players) all gave up their conscious thought and chose to do something only because someone told them to? NO! They do it because the community agreed it's the most fair system, and the community agreed to that because it IS the most fair system.

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

People, like agreements, should be flexible and should be allowed to change when presented with new/more/different ideas or opinions. We shouldn't be so rigid that seven instances of something that will happen hundreds or thousands of times over the life of the server should set the standard for everyone to follow.

Ok, in magical fairy land we can experiment with all sorts of agreements and try and find the magical one that makes everyone happy all the time.

But in the real world (or at least the fantasy fairy land of P99) if enough players stop agreeing to any agreement, that agreement ends. No matter how hard you worked to get rolls established, no matter how much you want rolls 5 days out of the week, if you convince just one player to break the existing agreement you could ruin all rolls, for everyone, forever. And if you convince enough players, you GUARANTEE that that will happen. Why are you refusing to understand this?

You don't just get to try every system out that you want. We all had one shot with Shady, and if the system we established had failed it would have fucked up all future chances of any system. Luckily for the server, you were an entirely different person a week ago, and instead of working to destroy the system, you worked to create it. For the first few days it was incredibly fragile, but now it's been going on long enough that if one lone loser breaks it there's a very good chance the staff will punish them. But again, if you convince enough people to abandon the agreement, everything you and everyone else has worked so hard for goes out the window. Quite possibly forever.

Originally Posted by Senescant [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If we who want to roll are not willing to make some of those exact same compromises how can be claim to be any better than they are? If we are to be champions for the people, should we not be champions for ALL of the people? Even when our views differ from theirs?

Very, very easily. You've fallen into the trap of believing everyone's opinion is equally valid. They are not. Again, if every opinion was equally valid Scout would never have gotten off the ground, let alone been wildly successful for months. Again, there have always been people unhappy with the Scout roll ... but that doesn't matter, because not everyone's opinion is right! If you use Autofire and/or have super low latency, you have a million times better chance of winning a Scout/Shady turn-in. In no universe is that fair, but that won't stop Autofire/low latency users from wanting a system that benefits themselves.

Scout is by far the most fair system, for everyone. It doesn't matter if not everyone is happy with it, because no system will ever make everyone happy. By definition people with unfair advantage won't want to play in a fair system; that does not mean it's "unfair" to ignore their opinion! And even if that wasn't true, it would still be impossible to make everyone happy: even if Rogean showed up in-game like Oprah and started handing out Shady rings ("here's a ring for you, and you, and ...") that still would cheese a lot of people off.

But there absolutely is 100% objectively more fair systems and less fair systems. Clicking is less fair, rolling is more. This basic logic has enabled literally hundreds of successful scout rolls without a single click, and just to repeat it once more: everything about Shady is the exact same as Scout, except the variance. If you truly think you've invented a fairer system than the one adopted by the hundreds of people involved in all of those rolls, and you truly feel that your "fairer" system is fairer because it gives a voice to people who want an unfair advantage over everyone else, and if you're willing to destroy the completely and actually fair system that everyone else involved has already agreed to just to get what you want ... fuck.

[Senescant]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You've fallen into the trap of believing everyone's opinion is equally valid. They are not.

We'll have to agree to disagree for now. On many of these topics.

I don't believe that bullying people into a singular option when other options are available is the right path to take. Nor do we have the authority to do that. You and I alone are not "the players". Changes have been made to this agreement so far, by me, with the consult of the people who have made their opinions known both publicly and privately, and changes can continue to be made if people see fit.

[loramin]

P.S. Obviously I feel passionately about this, and obviously I'm fighting you very hard, but to be clear: I do think it's incredibly noble and good that you are not just assuming your opinion is right, and that it should be forced on others. That's an incredibly good place to be coming from, and I don't want my defense to be misunderstood: everyone should always question things the way you are.

I'm just saying, while all of the above is true and good, and while we are subjective humans with subjective opinions ... there are still right and wrong opinions also, and objectively fair and unfair systems also.