+- CDBZ Archive (http://alex.zulenka.com)
+-- Forum: Out of Character Forums (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: RPG Discussion (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=125)
+--- Thread: Questions about proposed changes (/showthread.php?tid=16194)
Questions about proposed changes - Juno - 01-09-2011
Jarka Wrote:Read it, hated it, re-read it, liked it for the most part.I was under the impression that item purchases wouldn't factor into CL — that CL would only go up when you spent Prestige on Power Level or on some sort of Techniques.
Here are my main thoughts of dissent (warning: I have been existing on a diet of Nyquil and Dayquil, so this might not be as coherent as I would like):
1) CL should have a weighted balance of PL and Purchases if we're doing a unified currency. If somebody wants to spend their prestige on, like, a spaceship, it doesn't make sense that they would be more powerful in a fight. I like that CL gives the underdog a chance, but I think as it has been proposed it gives the underdog a little too much of a chance. If CL was weighted, like, 67% PL and 33% purchases, I think it would keep a little more DBZ flavor while still not discouraging them from buying techs and items.
I do like your idea concerning Community Grading, though, specifically the reward for graders as opposed to the "you can't be graded unless you've graded." Mainly because it keeps the people from posting pointless, useless C&C yet still allows them to grow, while at the same time rewarding people who DO put effort into the criticism.
As far as the whole out of 10 thing — I know that 10 was a number you probably pulled off the top of your head, but I'm going to go on record saying I think that it (as well as the other numbers you used in your post) is a little low, in my opinion.
Questions about proposed changes - John Doe - 01-09-2011
Juno Wrote:I was under the impression that item purchases wouldn't factor into CL — that CL would only go up when you spent Prestige on Power Level or on some sort of Techniques.
Kaden Wrote:CL increases with every purchase a player makes. If they raise their character’s PL, it goes up. If they buy an item, it goes up. If they purchase a Custom Tech, it goes up. Hopefully you get the idea.
Questions about proposed changes - Juno - 01-09-2011
Well, that's interesting.
I'm happy with the system aside from that (items = power? eh) and standardizing custom tech prices.
Questions about proposed changes - Sigfried Hunin - 01-09-2011
Yar har.
Questions about proposed changes - Jonathan Meer - 01-09-2011
Jarka Wrote:Read it, hated it, re-read it, liked it for the most part.
Here are my main thoughts of dissent (warning: I have been existing on a diet of Nyquil and Dayquil, so this might not be as coherent as I would like):
1) CL should have a weighted balance of PL and Purchases if we're doing a unified currency. If somebody wants to spend their prestige on, like, a spaceship, it doesn't make sense that they would be more powerful in a fight. I like that CL gives the underdog a chance, but I think as it has been proposed it gives the underdog a little too much of a chance. If CL was weighted, like, 67% PL and 33% purchases, I think it would keep a little more DBZ flavor while still not discouraging them from buying techs and items.
People have different visions for their different characters. The attempt is to make a system that allows for multiple types of character builds.
If you make one type of build more proper or powerful than another, you encourage homogeneity. Homogeneity is boring.
I've no idea what you mean by CL giving an underdog a chance. If people have equal CL, it indicates (generally) that they have equal-ish Prestige. Where does the underdog get an advantage?
Quote:ISSUE 1: I'm sure this will be fleshed out, but I'm going to bring this up now so it's not forgotten: It will need to be clarified to the community what prestige should be expected from a good post...
http://cdbzrpg.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28064
Most of your concerns in this first issue were already noted.
Quote:SOLUTION [2]: Reward the graders (similar to the points Sig and I brought up in some other thread). Good critique (one pro, one con, and suggested prestige) gives the grader 2 prestige. Okay critique (one pro or con and suggested prestige) gives the grader 1 prestige. Just the suggested prestige or an unhelpful comment ("Good job. 8 pts") gives the grader no bonus prestige. Eliminate the "You can't ask until you've graded rule". This encourages people to grade without adding yet another burden to staff.
For Issue 2, I am wholeheartedly against giving people Prestige solely for Critique-ing. I'm also against having to grade Critiques. That's not what it's about. That's also a shit-ton of extra work.
The solution can be simple enough: for every thread submitted to review, the person must link to two of the Critiques they submitted on threads of a similar size for every Criticism submission they make. Easy-peasy, japaneezy.
EDIT: This system isn't perfect; none would be. There will probably be parasites as time goes on. They'll be handled. But I've got 13 signatures in another topic that supports optimism for Chubbs as a whole.
Questions about proposed changes - Jarka - 01-09-2011
Juno Wrote:As far as the whole out of 10 thing — I know that 10 was a number you probably pulled off the top of your head, but I'm going to go on record saying I think that it (as well as the other numbers you used in your post) is a little low, in my opinion.
The 10 (or whatever) would be multiplied across the number of posts of the thread (that got buried in my rambles). A thread of 7 quality with 9 posts would actually be worth 63 prestige points. And you're right, that number was just pulled up for discussion sake.
Questions about proposed changes - Victoria - 01-09-2011
Whaaat? Professions are being nix'd? That makes me sad.
I also am not a huge fan of items = CL. But, if we do what Jarka said and weight the precentage of what gives CL more that would be good...
I still don't know how well this community grading will go. Even I know that I get lazy and don't peticularily like to read someone's threads. And usually if I do, it's someone that I like or know. So how do we deal with people being random, uncaring, grading just to grade? Also, I agree with what she said about a cap...if I make a 30 post thread, I'd hope for more than what a 5 post thread would have gotten. Pending quality of course...
Questions about proposed changes - Jonathan Meer - 01-09-2011
I am absolutely, completely against an algorithm for the community grading. Completely. That entirely misses the point.
Community grading will not merely award Prestige; it will make suggestions (some of which will require Staff confirmation) for all rewards that are possible, including Techniques, Items, and perhaps even Power-ups (many of these will require Staff confirmation before they are ratified). Introducing an algorithm would make the Criticism process a simple routine, and would limit the outcome to a particular, rather arbitrary, set of possibilities. This system needs to be as organic as possible.
Questions about proposed changes - Jonathan Meer - 01-09-2011
Step 1) Member A who apparently did not read the original recommendation of the community grading system, and has largely not participated in the conversation on the subject thus far, paints a ridiculous, obviously flawed form of the system and insists that 'We must be clear that we don't mean THIS.'
Step 2) Member B objects, 'That form seems ridiculous, I don't want that. lol'
Step 3) *facepalm*
Questions about proposed changes - Victoria - 01-09-2011
Meer, I don't want to be rude, but if you don't have anything good to say don't say anything at all. That last post was, if anything, pointless other than to seem like a jerk.
Questions about proposed changes - Vad - 01-09-2011
Keep it civil, Meer.
We're not here to bash heads. We're here to collaborate our ideas and opinions. This goes for everyone. Arguments are fine as long as they're kept civil and we don't start making pot shots at each other.
Questions about proposed changes - Super Buu - 01-09-2011
Kaden Wrote:I definitely understand that concern. Kaden himself is a "tech whore" and many of those are fairly insignificant techs that work together to do something more interesting. I haven't thought of anything to address that, though; anything I've thought of doesn't seem worth throwing out standardized costs for, if that makes sense.
I'm not sure what the actual advantage of standardized costs is. If you're worrying about the literal mechanics of keeping in diminishing returns in whilst allowing variable technique costs, you could do something like this:
Every time you hit a certain 'spent Prestige' mark on custom techs, like 50, 100, 150 or whatever, you have to pay an extra fixed cost that increases each time. So if I have 40 spent Prestige on techs, and I want to buy another tech that costs 20, I have to pay an extra 10 Prestige to pass the 50 mark. At 100 spent, that's 20 Prestige. At 150, it's 30. Come to think of it, if it was simpler you could do the whole system that way with just a global spent Prestige.
... You know, after typing it out so many times, I have one more question. Why are we calling XP Prestige now? >_>
Questions about proposed changes - Jarka - 01-09-2011
Jonathan Meer Wrote:Step 1) Member A who apparently did not read the original recommendation of the community grading system, and has largely not participated in the conversation on the subject thus far, paints a ridiculous, obviously flawed form of the system and insists that 'We must be clear that we don't mean THIS.'
Step 2) Member B objects, 'That form seems ridiculous, I don't want that. lol'
Step 3) *facepalm*
Fuck you. Seriously. I'm fucking done. You know why you guys can't keep a goddamn member? It's because you treat the community like shit. Don't treat me like a fucking CHILD. I read the community grading as outlined by Kaden in the original post on this thread and responded on my feelings of this. I have posted in the other discussions when I felt I had something to contribute. I'm sorry if I don't like repeating myself or screaming until I get my way. They're asking for fucking opinions and I gave mine.
I fucking quit.
Questions about proposed changes - Jonathan Meer - 01-09-2011
'Tis the way the discussion is going.
I edited it down multiple times to get it to that point.
It's to point out what I see as a significant problem in this discussion: Because nothing has been said about the exact intricacies of the system (whereas the themes have been expressed quite clearly, and discussed), it seems that multiple people (most recently Jarka) have taken it upon themselves to say 'Look here, there are ridiculous ways the intricacies can be painted, therefore I think we should really wonder about these themes.'
I'm being so militant about it here and now because I know how the Chubbs community works when it comes to discussing these things. Matters get blown shit-ton out-of-proportion in a matter of a half-page. Before you know it, people are lined up against this strange, obviously flawed rendition of the system that Jarka criticized (and that no one has ever suggested; we call such a thing a 'straw man,' if it is done purposefully), and decisions and stances are formed in the controversy that flows out of it.
And I don't want that to happen to this, because I really like the community-grading idea, and I don't want it to get fucked up the ass. And I am not in any way suggesting Jarka and Vic did this intentionally. I'm 100% certain I've operated in the exact same capacity on any number of discussions that have happened here in the past.
Questions about proposed changes - Jonathan Meer - 01-09-2011
Jarka Wrote:Fuck you. Seriously. I'm fucking done. You know why you guys can't keep a goddamn member? It's because you treat the community like shit. Don't treat me like a fucking CHILD. I read the community grading as outlined by Kaden in the original post on this thread and responded on my feelings of this. I have posted in the other discussions when I felt I had something to contribute. I'm sorry if I don't like repeating myself or screaming until I get my way. They're asking for fucking opinions and I gave mine.
I fucking quit.
Dude, I'm an asshole, and non-Staff. Don't leave because of bullshit I say.
Questions about proposed changes - Victoria - 01-09-2011
Jarka, just ignore him. Meer has been like this for years, don't quit just because of him =/. You made good points that even I agree with.
Questions about proposed changes - Sigfried Hunin - 01-09-2011
lawl drama is dramatic.
EDIT: wut conversaaatiooonnnnn
Questions about proposed changes - Piper Juunanagou - 01-09-2011
lawl remarks that don't add to the conversation is pointless.
What's wrong with CL involving items? I mean, CL is supposed to be an OOC value determined by what you've purchased, right?
Questions about proposed changes - Vad - 01-09-2011
Jarka, I understand your frustration, but that wasn't called for. Don't do it again.
This is the last verbal warning and it goes for everyone in this thread. The next uncivil argument I see will result in me throwing out warnings for each party involved.
Questions about proposed changes - Kaden - 01-09-2011
Piper Juunanagou Wrote:What's wrong with CL involving items? I mean, CL is supposed to be an OOC value determined by what you've purchased, right?
To address the comments about items = CL, see above.
Having a scouter, for example, should affect your ability to combat other people, am I right?