|
Wiz posted:This is a fair point - the gameplay is very complex but the overarching choices you make actually aren't. Simply having a series of votes on broad policies honestly might just work better. What would you guys think about scrapping the whole party made legislation and just having a series of broader choices made by me to vote on? Speaking for myself I'd personally prefer keeping the legislative aspect as it is, maybe with some correction to deal with the LAs (ban quote-voting at least), but do whatever makes this LP most fun for you.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:18 |
|
|
I guess the problem is that the current legislative style would work and make sense if we were playing as the government of a nation. but we aren't We're playing as one sentient who has to go around and do everything himself if you want to get things done. There isn't a clearly defined budget. We can't multitask. There isn't a clear cause and effect to things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It's not my intention to gently caress up your LP, Wiz. As with the silly voting games gimmick, just say the word and I will shut it down. It's really more a symptom than a cause. I'm going to bed now, but I think there are definitely going to be some changes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Syless posted:Speaking for myself I'd personally prefer keeping the legislative aspect as it is, maybe with some correction to deal with the LAs (ban quote-voting at least), but do whatever makes this LP most fun for you. I'd like to point out that all of my votes (and those who voted identically to mine) wound up being meaningless in the last round. E.g., everything I voted for either passed without needing my votes, or could not have passed regardless; everything I voted against either failed regardless of my votes, or could not have passed regardless, etc. In other words, despite being the biggest party, the Lazy Assholes did not change the outcome of the latest vote.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I'd like to point out that all of my votes (and those who voted identically to mine) wound up being meaningless in the last round. E.g., everything I voted for either passed without needing my votes, or could not have passed regardless; everything I voted against either failed regardless of my votes, or could not have passed regardless, etc. You can't say that definitively by looking at pure votes. Legislative Momentum is important. For instance, my Peeping Tom Bill would have gotten the vote of the HSF party if the vote had been closer. If you had voted for my legislation, there was a decent chance the peeping tom act would have passed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I'd like to point out that all of my votes (and those who voted identically to mine) wound up being meaningless in the last round. E.g., everything I voted for either passed without needing my votes, or could not have passed regardless; everything I voted against either failed regardless of my votes, or could not have passed regardless, etc. True, and I don't actually blame you personally, you've proven that despite the party you've founded you're actually interested in making this work, it's all the people who just quote your vote for minimal effort that are getting tiresome. Though if the LAs and HSF had changed their vote to 'yes' on the Peeping Tom Act it still would have lost 17-22 or 18-23.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
Ilanin posted:If you want the full sensation, stand up and read one of Tomn's budget analysis posts out loud; that'll give you a good idea of what a filibuster's like... I object! My analyses are at least twice as useful as your average filibuster!  Neruz posted:No thats what a filibuster is supposed to be like, these days politicians can filibuster by basically raising their hand and saying 'I filibuster' because yes they really are that loving lazy. Reminds me of those comics where the characters have descriptions of their lines instead of actual dialogue. Though that WOULD speed up the political process considerably... "Long-winded and pompous platitudes." "Overblown and emotional objection to tone!" "Barbed reference to recent opposition political disaster." "Attempt to deflect topic to less recent but more important opposition disaster." "Dogged refusal to abandon recent opposition failures!" "Veiled personal attack on speaker's intelligence." I don't think there'd be a whole lot lost, really.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
Its just an example of how counting votes in the aftermath and saying that your's didn't matter isn't correct.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
sniper4625 posted:While some drop off is to be expected, I think the petty back and forth and geno-chat definitely played a role in diminishing enthusiasm and participation. I'm not entirely sure how to turn that around. It'd help if we knew why people stopped voting - any lurkers want to chime in on this one? Well as a member of the Lazy rear end in a top hat party, I have voted in all sessions to the best of my ability trying to vote for proposals that seem reasonable and in line with races I like, but have not gotten involved in the debates. This is because of my complete ignorance about the game mechanics but also because I just don't find it fun to get involved in a parliamentary LP. It's a shame that my actions are discouraging Wiz because I love his LPs and voting was one of the more amusing aspects of HohenLP and the initial CreteLP. I eventually burnt out on the legislation part of Crete because it was just a slog to read, but I remember initially it being very fun and clear cut in that we were forcing Wiz to balance War, Infrastructure, Money or Ramblerousing. I knew from the outset that this LP wouldn't be my thing but Wiz is an amazing storyteller and the monkey's paw aspect of goon directives always leads to high comedy. Maybe if voting sessions were less frequent as mentioned things wouldn't be so bad?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
 Still here, drowning its desire to eat the other legislators with boarine whiskey.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
^^^ I didn't take you off the list?Xtanstic posted:Well as a member of the Lazy rear end in a top hat party, I have voted in all sessions to the best of my ability trying to vote for proposals that seem reasonable and in line with races I like, but have not gotten involved in the debates. This is because of my complete ignorance about the game mechanics but also because I just don't find it fun to get involved in a parliamentary LP. It's a shame that my actions are discouraging Wiz because I love his LPs and voting was one of the more amusing aspects of HohenLP and the initial CreteLP. I eventually burnt out on the legislation part of Crete because it was just a slog to read, but I remember initially it being very fun and clear cut in that we were forcing Wiz to balance War, Infrastructure, Money or Ramblerousing. I knew from the outset that this LP wouldn't be my thing but Wiz is an amazing storyteller and the monkey's paw aspect of goon directives always leads to high comedy. Maybe if voting sessions were less frequent as mentioned things wouldn't be so bad? If we did longer gaps between sessions, we'd definitely have to go with less specific instructions. Certainly an idea worth considering. Actually, a good question is: how long do games usually go? In Crete we knew we had a strict time limit, so regularized sessions were pretty easy. If we did, say, 10 year sessions in TLF, how much of the game would that represent? 15 years?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:35
|
|
|
Syless posted:Speaking for myself I'd personally prefer keeping the legislative aspect as it is, maybe with some correction to deal with the LAs (ban quote-voting at least), but do whatever makes this LP most fun for you. Personally I don't think the Lazy Assholes matter or are in particular need of being singled out. The basic problem is this: How many people here exactly are interested in voting whether we research lasers, space bombs, space factories, or engines first? Because once the Federation is formed, and once it's clear who is and isn't going to be in the Federation, that's all we'll be voting about - the minuate and logistics of war. Hell, we're already halfway there - look at how many clauses in the last round of voting there were that focused solely on building up infrastructure for the coming conflict. All there is for us to think about and vote upon once the Federation is established is "How to win the war." We would be Senators trying to do a General Staff's job, in effect. Is that what we want? Would we find it interesting and compelling? Personally, I doubt it. The whole point of politics is trying to reconcile differing and competing viewpoints into a whole that doesn't immediately crash and burn under its own weight, and you can't really get very different viewpoints if you have exactly the same goal and a limited number of ways to go about that goal. That said, I'm in it for the political arguments.* If most of the folks here are genuinely interested in legislating for logistics and I'm an outlier, the current system could do well. Otherwise, I think we need a change and we would have needed one whether the Lazy Assholes existed or not. *This might surprise anyone who looks at my posts, but when you get right down to it it's no fun trying to keep everyone on track when everyone already basically is on track. Rerailing only makes sense when the train's been derailed beforehand! Tomn fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
sniper4625 posted:^^^ I didn't take you off the list? TLF games tend to last 50-100 years, much longer than that would be shocking if it's not deliberate. After 3090 research starts to exist which is basically just 'whoever gets this first wins'. So 5 years already means there won't be too many sessions. Tomn posted:Because once the Federation is formed, and once it's clear who is and isn't going to be in the Federation, that's all we'll be voting about - the minuate and logistics of war. Hell, we're already halfway there - look at how many clauses in the last round of voting there were that focused solely on building up infrastructure for the coming conflict. All there is for us to think about and vote upon once the Federation is established is "How to win the war." We would be Senators trying to do a General Staff's job, in effect. Is that what we want? Would we find it interesting and compelling? It won't really be the logistics of war- the other races do all the war, and the Hydral's ability to intervene directly (attacking armadas and whatnot) goes down over time. And the nature of TLF means that just because a race hates us doesn't mean that they have to be eliminated, since there's so many ways to backdoor people into Federations. The current method could still be interesting if, say, the Acutians, Boarines, and Burlusts are in an opposing alliance and you've got Solis Infernus undermining their diplomatic relations while the CSF is trying to make the Boarines our ally and ANCAP is trying to make the Acutians our ally so they can toss planet crackers around, etc etc. It's not really minutae since the nature of what we're pursuing always works on a grand scale.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
The largest party is not only larger by two votes and is only about a 4th of hte voting pop. So not too much to worry about
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Just jumping back in to say that I liked what the Owls On Drugs party was doing until the big parties (and Sniper (Yes I'm calling you out on bureaucratic partiality)) came in and said "No you can't have any vagueness in your bills or we'll tell all our party members to vote it down and they'll follow use without thinking." I honestly think "Do whatever to keep the cool owl men from dying from radiation" is better legislation than "Spend exactly XXXX credits to save the cool owl men from dying from radiation". Even the clause 'no more than X' is pretty bad because it still carries the connotation that Wiz should spend X on that thing, whereas if you give general directions I have to assume Wiz has the sense not to blow all the budget on one bill, and instead only spend what is a reasonable amount for the stated goal. Because the majority of us have never played this game and have no idea how much poo poo costs or what is a reasonable amount to pay for a thing. tl;dr: Budgeting is super boring IRL, and it's even worse in forum games about computer games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
The OOD bill this session was "send all of the weak fleets of people we like to get destroyed a vastly more powerful fleet", it wasn't rejected for the budget. Some things do need a budget or at least better guidance involved - "make these two races like each other" could be calling for a paid dispatch which costs 4-6,000 a month but does it very quickly or setting up trade routes/attitude buildings which are free/give you money but have a very gradual impact with very little in between, you kind of need to let other people know which one of those you want.
Rogue0071 fucked around with this message at 02:53 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
Rogue0071 posted:The OOD bill this session was "send all of the weak fleets of people we like to get destroyed a vastly more powerful fleet", it wasn't rejected for the budget. Some things do need a budget or at least better guidance involved - "make these two races like each other" could be calling for a paid dispatch which costs 4-6,000 a month but does it very quickly or setting up trade routes/attitude buildings which are free/give you money but have a very gradual impact with very little in between, you kind of need to let other people know which one of those you want. Honestly, I'd rather have legislation that just let Wiz do one of those based on what seems reasonable/his whims than to pick one, have it be the wrong one because I don't know a drat thing about this game, and watch one race get conquered because I don't know what the hell I'm doing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Which of those is 'reasonable' depends entirely on what your intent is. If you're trying to set the stage for a long-term relationship, you want the slow, free route; if you're trying to just get the last few points quickly to get someone into the Fed or trying to avoid a war or something you want the quick, expensive option. Asking Wiz to pick between the two is asking him to decide the broad policy, which defeats the entire point of the legislative part of the LP. Making that kind of call, or a lot of similar ones, is something parties should be doing under the current system. If you want someone to look over your ideas and check the in-game feasibility of them, you could ask other people; we have a Skype channel where several people including myself, Visc, and Wiz are on regularly and can give game advice, for instance. I don't really check through each bill thoroughly until they are all finalized but I'm perfectly happy to answer any game mechanics questions I can if people ask directly in the thread, as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
The legislative system has been a blast but drat, legislating is hard and it does seem like things would work better if ol' Harry was planning things on his own and maybe bouncing his ideas off us, having a vote on what he should be doing rather than us writing up precise instructions for him to follow like I was re-taking COMPSCI 101 for the fourth time. Besides, I'm more thinking of the Owls On Drugs as a planet-wide movement for now. Even the Andors can't seem to grasp the concept of getting hosed up, let alone the Acutians. We on Lycian all still love Harry but dude, you've got a nice little computer up there to help you with all the nitty-gritty of your decisions rather than us submitting all these "IF INVASIONSIZE > 150 THEN ACUTIANS.PLANETCRACK(INVADERS)" codesheets. Goddamn that's gettin' old.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Rogue0071 posted:Which of those is 'reasonable' depends entirely on what your intent is. If you're trying to set the stage for a long-term relationship, you want the slow, free route; if you're trying to just get the last few points quickly to get someone into the Fed or trying to avoid a war or something you want the quick, expensive option. Asking Wiz to pick between the two is asking him to decide the broad policy, which defeats the entire point of the legislative part of the LP. Making that kind of call, or a lot of similar ones, is something parties should be doing under the current system. If you want someone to look over your ideas and check the in-game feasibility of them, you could ask other people; we have a Skype channel where several people including myself, Visc, and Wiz are on regularly and can give game advice, for instance. I don't really check through each bill thoroughly until they are all finalized but I'm perfectly happy to answer any game mechanics questions I can if people ask directly in the thread, as well. So now you're saying I need to install Skype to participate in game on the forums? No thanks. e: to elaborate, you're not going to make this thread more fun and accessible to the masses by making us dedicate even more time and off-site communication to it. ZiegeDame fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
You could also, you know, post questions directly in the thread, Skype will just get you slightly quicker answers. Frankly, I would be fine with Wiz's proposed change, but it's not really that hard to figure out appropriate actions to pursue a goal and the whole point of parties was that people with the time/interest to do that would be party leaders and make bills/provide voting suggestions. The thing that's been weakening my interest in the LP is the really annoying and played out "I'm going to be even lazier/too lazy to even do that" gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
Wiz, I don't really know what you want out of a poster in this thread and with my very limited knowledge of this game I just don't feel like I can make any kind of informed choices or role playing without spending an inordinate amount of time reading posts, checking the OP for information, or using offsite utilities to pick other posters brains. I really don't have the time at the moment to engage any further than being a Lazy rear end in a top hat, but if you want people to move out of that party and into another one then just remove me from the rolls altogether. I'll lurk in the thread until I can get a better handle on what you want out of a poster, what the game requires, and for when I have more time to engage in everything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:59
|
|
+ 
= 
|
Rogue0071 posted:You could also, you know, post questions directly in the thread, Skype will just get you slightly quicker answers. Frankly, I would be fine with Wiz's proposed change, but it's not really that hard to figure out appropriate actions to pursue a goal and the whole point of parties was that people with the time/interest to do that would be party leaders and make bills/provide voting suggestions. The thing that's been weakening my interest in the LP is the really annoying and played out "I'm going to be even lazier/too lazy to even do that" gimmick. Now is that actual "laziness" or is that just "not in possession of enough free time to spend on researching and crafting a precisely-calculated bill that you're ready and willing to support and defend throughout the voting phase?" I like to be able to say "let's make some peace with these guys" without people getting all on my case about "hey but look at all these ~~loopholes~~ in your proposal, mine is much more researched and well thought out you see" and let's be honest, this game has way too many variable costs, unintended consequences, and game mechanics witchcraft for any observer to make an informed decision without consulting the game's active player 11-12 times about all the different factors involved at that particular moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
Pittsburgh Lambic posted:Besides, I'm more thinking of the Owls On Drugs as a planet-wide movement for now. Even the Andors can't seem to grasp the concept of getting hosed up, let alone the Acutians. We on Lycian all still love Harry but dude, you've got a nice little computer up there to help you with all the nitty-gritty of your decisions rather than us submitting all these "IF INVASIONSIZE > 150 THEN ACUTIANS.PLANETCRACK(INVADERS)" codesheets. Goddamn that's gettin' old. And on Tiamat. This one finds the party a remarkable relief from politics whose entertainment value vanished long ago, and a growing number on Tiamat share your response to the chaos. Alas, We tend towards morose drinking rather than more pleasant drugs. Really, you don't want to see a tunnel network build on the orders of a tripping princess. It just doesn't end well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
Three or four choice votes on longer-term issues with a grander scope would be fine by me. A is the direct belligerent option, B is everyone makes nice and trades, C is for underhanded or indirect action and D is for zany plans that we cook up sometimes. Occasionally there would be votes about ethics and which races to favor. Ex: Harry is sitting on a huge pile of captured pilots and the solar system is circling the drain "A- We can make a lot of cash immediately to do a huge pile of expensive stuff now by selling hundreds of sophonts into slavery. B- Or, we can slowly build up that capital through dispatches and ransoming pilots. Going the slow route might mean not having enough time or resources to respond to every crisis, but we can sleep at night knowing we did the right thing. C- We could also capture, kill or steal anything we need, which won't make us any friends but will get results and leave us with pilots for later. D- The final option is Harry takes a three year nap and sees if things are any better afterwards."
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:Three or four choice votes on longer-term issues with a grander scope would be fine by me. A is the direct belligerent option, B is everyone makes nice and trades, C is for underhanded or indirect action and D is for zany plans that we cook up sometimes. Occasionally there would be votes about ethics and which races to favor. So basically Mode with Red, Blue & Green options? I'm feeling very green about this approach.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
Peanut3141 posted:So basically Mode with Red, Blue & Green options? I'm feeling very green about this approach. Actual legislation is time-consuming, frustrating and boring as hell. I enjoy pretending to draft stump speeches and all, but this game has enough moving parts that make it difficult to interact with as we are now. I have played the game some and so know roughly what a lot of the actions are and their likely short-term results, which puts me ahead many of the others in this thread. This seems to have been a problem so far. We have legislators that are using precise commands as if they were playing the game and others who just stumbled in and thought space dragons were pretty keen guys. Neither is wrong, but they don't mix well. Doing the choice as: Space Jesus, Space Buddha, Space Satan or Space Crazy may be simplifying too much, but I think it's a direction to at least vaguely steer for. I need to check out the Mode thread. I think that was on these forums.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:Three or four choice votes on longer-term issues with a grander scope would be fine by me. A is the direct belligerent option, B is everyone makes nice and trades, C is for underhanded or indirect action and D is for zany plans that we cook up sometimes. Occasionally there would be votes about ethics and which races to favor. If Wiz DOES go the multiple choice route, I hope it's at least the various heads of the Hydral proposing the different options, bringing things full circle for how people envisioned this playing out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
Wiz please keep this a legislative LP purely for the sake of allowing me to continue advancing LP Vote Counting Spreadsheet Technology. It's come so far already!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It doesn't have anything to do with you, posters quitting because they take stufg personally will happen in every legislative LP and is not an issue, but it feels like the legislative sessions are growing increasingly anemic and the Lazy Assholes gimmick is getting very old, between these two things my own enjoyment is wavering. Eiba's idea sounds good though... Legislation for long term policy and special votes as needed. You know I'm not actually quitting because I'm taking stuff personally, right? I'm just finding the legislative aspect a little boring at the moment and I feel like I let the party down by not participating in the last session. I can't imagine that you of all people would fall for my Rebel Blob posts, so I'm not sure why you think that's why I'm quitting. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
Speaking as someone who effectively hasn't really played the game, trying to figure what to do and how to do it by combing over the OP, scattered Wizposts, and assorted random posters takes a ridiculous amount of work and time that no sane man would invest. Even with what I've managed to pick up by now, I still don't have a very good handle on certain aspects of the game, like how important RCI is and how much is a reasonable amount of credits to invest in it. The basic problem is that we're presented with a heaping helping of numbers everywhere, but without solid experience of the game it's hard to tell what exactly the significance of any given number is. It's kinda exhausting trying to keep up, and I can't blame anyone for not wanting to do so just so they can meaningfully participate in an Internet space game.Syless posted:It won't really be the logistics of war- the other races do all the war, and the Hydral's ability to intervene directly (attacking armadas and whatnot) goes down over time. And the nature of TLF means that just because a race hates us doesn't mean that they have to be eliminated, since there's so many ways to backdoor people into Federations. The current method could still be interesting if, say, the Acutians, Boarines, and Burlusts are in an opposing alliance and you've got Solis Infernus undermining their diplomatic relations while the CSF is trying to make the Boarines our ally and ANCAP is trying to make the Acutians our ally so they can toss planet crackers around, etc etc. It's not really minutae since the nature of what we're pursuing always works on a grand scale. The trouble with the scenario you present is that from a mechanical perspective there's no real reason not to do everything you've suggested, and thus no conflict. There's only two major possible objections to any given proposal there - arguments about cost and feasibility, which is just knee-slapping fun for the whole family, and arguments about the ethics of allowing X race to be destroyed, i.e. genocidechat. And that's assuming every party can actually find an interesting and unique angle to work instead of just presenting "The 6th building mandate bill on the roster". That's what I mean by minutiae - the only major points of disagreement we can really summon up that isn't the Taboo Subject is budget disputes and arcane points of specific in-game strategy that's hard for those who don't know the game to interact with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
Rogue0071 posted:You could also, you know, post questions directly in the thread, Skype will just get you slightly quicker answers. That's happened to me a couple of times. About important stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 09:05
|
|
|
I think what I'll do is reduce the number of legislative sessions, have legislation be about long term policy, and have special votes for anything that needs filling in-between. Essentially what Eiba proposed.Viscardus posted:You know I'm not actually quitting because I'm taking stuff personally, right? I'm just finding the legislative aspect a little boring at the moment and I feel like I let the party down by not participating in the last session. I can't imagine that you of all people would fall for my Rebel Blob posts, so I'm not sure why you think that's why I'm quitting. I chalked your resignation up as a failure. Wiz fucked around with this message at 09:32 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
Hey guys, this is the first time since this thread started that I've actually been caught up enough to chime in, and I gotta say you folks are wasting a lot of time and energy on recriminations. The thing that's obvious from an outsider's perspective is that the vast majority of posts in this thread have been made by the same ten or twelve people. I'm not going to call anyone out or say you shouldn't be posting -- I love the little WizLP community we've established -- but if this thread is going to work, it needs to be more than just an extension of the same conversation we've been having for the last five years. You want newcomers and occasional posters to feel welcome and that's not going to happen if there's ten more pages of chatter every time they check on the thread. The irony is most of you seem to be aware of the problem, but your attempts to fix it are just making things worse. The thread is drowning in accusations, apologies, and helpful suggestions. Instead of all trying to steer, why not just have a little faith? Wiz knows what he's doing, we still have a lot of good goons eager to participate, and there's nothing wrong with this thread that can't be fixed with some patience and good humor, so relax. Once you've stopped trying to pull the ship in a dozen different directions, it might just right itself on its own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 09:58
|
|
|
Duckbag posted:Hey guys, this is the first time since this thread started that I've actually been caught up enough to chime in, and I gotta say you folks are wasting a lot of time and energy on recriminations. The thing that's obvious from an outsider's perspective is that the vast majority of posts in this thread have been made by the same ten or twelve people. I'm not going to call anyone out or say you shouldn't be posting -- I love the little WizLP community we've established -- but if this thread is going to work, it needs to be more than just an extension of the same conversation we've been having for the last five years. You want newcomers and occasional posters to feel welcome and that's not going to happen if there's ten more pages of chatter every time they check on the thread. The irony is most of you seem to be aware of the problem, but your attempts to fix it are just making things worse. The thread is drowning in accusations, apologies, and helpful suggestions. Instead of all trying to steer, why not just have a little faith? Wiz knows what he's doing, we still have a lot of good goons eager to participate, and there's nothing wrong with this thread that can't be fixed with some patience and good humor, so relax. Once you've stopped trying to pull the ship in a dozen different directions, it might just right itself on its own. I have to agree with a lot of this, to me it seemed like those with experience in legislative LPs just took off right out of the gate and never allowed time for the newer players to even get their feet wet before we had 10 pages about GENOCIDE!!! I started out wanting to give this a try, but once that happened I was basically saying "I can't match that, best not to try; I'll just watch and vote."
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
applebane posted:I have to agree with a lot of this, to me it seemed like those with experience in legislative LPs just took off right out of the gate and never allowed time for the newer players to even get their feet wet before we had 10 pages about GENOCIDE!!!  They all say Genocide is bad for you. I SAY IT'S GOOD FOR YOU! CLEANS UP THE GENE-POOL! They say  , I say  and things are as they should be.Let's get this show out of the ground and into the Skies, shall we? Who needs a stable future when you can have a hunnic future with stables?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
The main reason I haven't been participating is that the legislation process is too intimidating. That, and the angry senator shtick is really old. e: To be clear, the game seems really interesting and the result of the legislation is very good. It's a good LP but could use some work on inclusion. Saitorr fucked around with this message at 16:38 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
applebane posted:I have to agree with a lot of this, to me it seemed like those with experience in legislative LPs just took off right out of the gate and never allowed time for the newer players to even get their feet wet before we had 10 pages about GENOCIDE!!! To be honest, it feels like folks jumped the gun a bit here. Most legislative LPs I've seen, there's an easing-in process as people get used to how the game works, probe out what their fellow parties are like, and more importantly give their fellow legislators time to make stupid mistakes and major conflicting doctrinal decisions - really give people a reason to pick sides and hold grudges. Here we just went straight to the full volume shouting. I'm not sure why.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Not saying this is more than a part of it, but partly a lot of people feel rather strongly about war crimes in games. And there's a lot of killing in this game, whether at the hands of the AI or the player. Readingaccount fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:18 |
|
|
This is what I'll do: - More updates - Fewer sessions - Sessions will be about setting long-term policies, not mapping out individual actions - Special votes to handle anything important enough that I can't make a judgement on using the policies set out Update tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 19:33
|
|