Quick find code: 42-43-536-65597114
..and finally a Gop event that I'm likely to be able to be online for!
(albeit very tired, and probably falling asleep )
I wonder if the CM team have got a commission racket going with Richard the cape seller... o:
Bear in mind this was posted a couple of Months back, so may appear a bit out of context, in places.
When I've finished posting, I'll add a link to the last post, in this one, so you can skip it if you wish.
Any input would be appreciated, though as it was pitched at a different audience, there may be some things which seem odd, but which you can take as being rejigged to fit, when noticed.
Internal links will need redoing, so than may take a while.
28-Mar-2015 09:39:12 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 10:19:41 by Yusou Bhoroi
There are certain things to consider here, and I think that, for my own part, my ideas may best be explained by first detailing as many of these (with example) as possible, and then going into the various forms of competition that I can think of, showing which of those things each can fulfill.
Please forgive me if this turns out to be a bad way of laying out the ideas, I may need to come back and completely reorganise, if that should prove the case.
While this is intended as an additional thing to the concurrently running events, and it might be said that those events cover for those who wish to play in a more casual way, it is my opinion that everybody should be considered, where possible, and that any ways of doing competitions which don't exclude portions of people (I'll go into the ways in which that can happen, later on), should be looked into - within the contexts of the aims of the competitions, and the needs of the games and communities.
28-Mar-2015 09:39:13 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:45:51 by Yusou Bhoroi
Other projects for the promotion of enjoyment, increased use, and structures for encouraging competitive play for those interested, for minigames have been attempted, and they too may be mentioned for comparison.
Previous projects which I've been involved with have been put on hold/slower development courses, due to requirements for more administration (
These would probably be desirable, but the competition proposals made will hopefully be another avenue, which will be easier to implement, run, and have good effects; any fruition from their other methods would no doubt compliment any benefits from competitions, should they prove to be an idea worth consideration.
28-Mar-2015 09:44:34 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:46:21 by Yusou Bhoroi
What can a competition achieve?
Fun thing for those who prefer more structured competition.
Be different from a purely exploratory, or casual event, having set participants, a formal structure, and an end goal. This can help benefit more casual events, too, as it can make sure that both groups of playstyles can be catered for, without upsetting the other.
Be a way for activities without an official highscores to have some sort of official ranking.
Be fair to all the who participate, regardless of skill.
While this has tried to split up the groups of competitors fairly, and make sure all can take part, its size, and inclusion of more casual players, or those who don't use the available sources to keep up with rounds, has meant it has become unwieldy, and is taking a very long time to complete.
Furthermore, even within the groupings, there can be vast differences, and as this is a long duration tournament, positioning within the ranks isn't the aim, as would have been the case in more organised groups, which hold regular tournaments)
28-Mar-2015 09:44:35 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:46:54 by Yusou Bhoroi
Make sure that any 'politics' between various users of the content, won't prevent the smooth running of the tournament, or make it invalid. Structuring it in the right way, can avoid this.
Prevent the outcome being a forgone conclusion (Same-old same-old.. only benefits established communities, and only certain parts of those, so novel contests can be fresh, and put people on even footings):
Keep the contest a contest, and make sure that while it supports competitive play, it also allows participants a fair chance of attaining something, if they try hard. If everyone knows who the winner will be, before the start, merely by knowing who is competing, then it's no fun for people to try (even for the winners), and no fun to watch.
Be unusual, or interesting:
To take a different approach to competition, or have an intriguing and lesser used format.
Having an unusual format helps to level the playing field, and relieve the tensions, allowing people to take something lightly. However, it may just give advantage from one group, to another. Making a mixture of formats can, alongside other ability groupings, iprovide more people with an opportunity to do well, as well as giving newcomers a chance to succeed - or at least, hopefully, make it more attractive to take part.
An alternative approach to competition can change what the main aim and focus of the players is, putting more on an equal footing, and allowing tensions to be diffused, or morphed into something else (something that doesn't apply to the usual rifts, so can be taken lightly, or be in the control of others).
28-Mar-2015 09:44:35 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:47:25 by Yusou Bhoroi
To increase awareness of the activities' existence, in the absence of active reasons to know of their being. This can have varying degrees of effectiveness, from merely being a footnote, to being active promotion of, or even participation in the competitions; there are now much easier, though more varied, ways of doing this, now, and it'd be counterintuitive to not use the most effective measures now available, especially if the space exists. Things can grow in popularity, rather fast, and unexpectedly - it can only be known if tried.
Be a way to encourage more people to try/use/enjoy the content:
To encourage people who only see the content in a bad way, due to previous encounters, or bad word from those who've had unpleasant experiences, to see the gmae in a different light, so that they may be willing (or eager ) to give the activity another try.
It can also make newer players more aware of the content's uses, and the different ways it can be enjoyed.
Get people following/behind a general movement of fun contests for many parts of lesser-used content:
Build popularity for trying out, and perhaps becoming good at, many of the activities with fewer players, because it's seen as a more worthwhile part of the game (reward rebalancing would work well for that, but so would encouragement from JAGEX to place value on using all bits of content, and becoming adept at them). It would help enspire more competitions, and gather people round supporting older content.
If each is highlighted in the right way, then it would be seen as more worthwhile to do those activities, and help people make use of more content, rather than sticking to only one way of playing. At the moment, lots of good (in some cases, very good) content goes largely unused, merely because it can't help with what's seen as the main aims, even when some would enjoy using that content just as much, if not more, than the mainstream things.
28-Mar-2015 09:44:36 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:47:55 by Yusou Bhoroi
This has precedent, though I do not believe it is what should be aimed for, even if it would benefit from CM involvement and organisation.
I will cover novel gameplay forms with this competition from, separately.
There are many disadvantages, and it fails to achieve anything particularly new. It even lacks ease of execution.
It has past tournaments to guide it.
It is simple in basic outline.
It benefits some parts of the competitive communities.
Can showcase the best players, and thus the 'best competitive play',if they choose to participate.
While the structure is simple, there are many ways it can go wrong, and it requires many measures to counter difficulties.
It takes a long time, and is subject to many possible delays.
Lacks complete cover, and cannot fit all in, so is thus invalid for total cover.
Requires people to be available at conflicting times, for long periods, either leading to withdrawal, or extreme length.
Extremely unfair on those who are unable to compete.
Likewise for those who are new, or less experienced.
Discludes new players, unless it takes form of permanent ranking system, which is an enormous undertaking.
Many of the best players would chose not to compete, or may be unaware.
Risks behaviour or attitude problems causing more harm than good, in terms of encouraging new players to try.
Lacks interest for those not involved, if they don't already have an interest - no real reason for people to watch or get involved -
\ without understanding of complexities/tactics/other, it will be dry and boring for those new to the game to watch.
\ experienced players won't train in a way that's any more understandable or entertaining.
\ anything in such line would be a side-thing, and not relate to the competition, or competers, directly.. and would have the same problems with not being interesting in itself.
Scoring methods may be unfair.
28-Mar-2015 09:44:37 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:48:30 by Yusou Bhoroi
(not all will be relevant to all forms of competition, and not all are feesable, appropriate, or effective; however, they are listed to act as seeds for further ideas, and to be a note that they have been considered):
For games where score is independent, making people do a match before/early on in the tournament, against anyone (or no one), with it being witnessed by a tournament overseer, so that it can be used in their place, if they are unable to play in one of their matchups.
These have to be predetermined to be backups, and properly witnessed, so that people can't just choose their best performance.
They help a lot with shortening the pereiods required for each round, as it caters for time-maching problems, and can allow for fairer matchups.
Separate scoring system:
Somtehing that goes by a different scoring system than that which is built in to the activity, if that system is either broken, unfair, or unsuitable.
Making it so only people within a certain ability margin, or those from a certain community, can take part.
This is to either make it fairer/target it at the people intended, or to make sure tensions between existing communities won't impact upon it.
Streaming the competitions would allow more to see them, and get involved in following them, perhaps highlighting some of the better play. Commentaries would allow things to be explained in a way that makes it more engaging, or understandable. People can't be excited about something, if they don't know about it, can't access it, or don't understand it.
The streaming would have to be done by a non-competing party, for many activities, as some computers can't handle it, and it wouldn't be fair to distract participants.
28-Mar-2015 09:44:37 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:49:06 by Yusou Bhoroi
Having post game analysis for some of the more exciting games may allow for the explanation of play, and the complexities behind it.
Having mini side-events related to the competition, which can be enjoyed or watched by more, may help.
Another possibility is having a series of streams which explain the intricacies behind the activities, as well as some of the background behind them, may be better viewing, and more able to convey the interesting information, than streams of the actual competition - at least for some parts. They could be used to actively encourage and enthuse those who are not yet taking part.
This may help with reducing tensions, for some activities, in some contexts - however it's not something likely to be useful in any supported by CM.
Allowing all-comers to participate, but having separate sub-competitions for different groups, either by ability, community, or other.
Gauging the correct value, or worth of any reward (should any be necessary at all), can help with both encouraging participation, and directing it to the right places. It can be used to help avoid cheating, though the effectiveness depends on many variables.
28-Mar-2015 09:45:11 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:49:30 by Yusou Bhoroi
This revolves around participants doing a set number of games, within the time limit, with any of the other participants (it doesn't matter which, as long as all the games are decided to be contributory, before they start), and an average of the scores, or total of wins:losses, from all the games a participant took part in, is taken, and used to determine the overall winner of the competition.
Any ties are decided either by tie-break factors (how well someone performed compared to their expected performance - relies on pre-existing rankings; smaller point factors, within games, et.cetera), or by matches between tied participants.
This format is sometimes used as an additional format, that runs in parallel with the main competitions (using the scores from the main competition),by a couple of Gop groups, and is the first round elimination/catagorisation-check method for the big annual contest that involves both those groups.
To a certain extent, this type of format can be used to counter timezone difficulties.
It can help more people participate, given playingtime constraints.
While it may seem counterintuitive, and at first complicated for participants, it's relatively easy to understand, once it has been explained.
Requires little involvement from Mods.
* Prizes can be set for catagories within the rankings (if done without saying where, then that can help discourage cheating, however it could cause problems, too).
Due to the mostly dull (and unpredictability of the exciting) nature of most of the matches, it would hold little interest for observers, and thus remove many of the benifits from mediatising them. This negates much of the point behind the idea.
It's not that easy to get people enthused about it, if they're not already into the game.
Because of little involvement and testing of all parts of the activity are done, little useful data can be gathered for future use.
28-Mar-2015 09:45:12 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:49:52 by Yusou Bhoroi
It's still open to many of the flaws that can be avoided in a few other formats (to do with scoring, in some activities).
There needs to be a lot of repetitive hands-on overseeing, of all the matches.
It may be hard to balance the number of matches needed per person (so as to avoid too many ties in overall score, and to get a good idea of average performance) with the overall length of the competition.
It's unworkable with a few activities.
res for Standard Contest variations
More things are already done on the next page!
28-Mar-2015 09:45:13 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:50:22 by Yusou Bhoroi
These involve teams of 'experienced' players* each bringing (a) new player(s) to the game, and training them up over a set period, ready for a competition between them, at the end. There are various forms of doing this, as well as differing ways to run the contests at the end. However, I believe it's best to cover the options under the two main idea formats, individually.
(*it can be done with beginners, but the problems can be discouraging for newer players, and their ability to train can be less effective, depending on the activity - however, there are good points for that, if it's feesable)
Any comparisons between different styles, or sub-formats of competition, are done with the assumption of CM backing and participation being fully behind them - so as to make an equal comparison between the varying formats, in the context of being an evaluation of the (possible) best way for CM to support a competitive venture for activities, if they should choose to do so (indeed, consideration for all other positives, obtainable through a competition, have been given; though it should always encourage competitive exploration and participation in the activities, where possible - whether in the form of PlayerVplayer, or Player*game).
28-Mar-2015 09:45:14 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:50:53 by Yusou Bhoroi
-I| Standard Train a Newcommer Format |I-
This has been tried in the past (
The intentions can be:
To bring new people into the game, and get a few of them enthused for the finer 'arts' of play, while still encouraging others to enjoy the game.
Make them feel valued members, who can -
\- join in with existing groups,
\- compete evenly, without feeling unequal,
\- feel they can turn to more experienced players for any guidance they may need.
Encourage groups who are less accepting of newer players to start being more tolerant, and value newer players, both as individuals, and by realising that without them, the activity gradually dies out.
Immediately boost the number of newer players, so that future newcommers have more regular players within their skill horizons.
Work as a boost to newer player numbers by word of mouth, through groups of players who wouldn't otherwise have come into contact with the game.
To give players interested in competition an insight into the world of competitive x.
To give newcommers to the activity a chance to compete in a competition, on an even footing, while still remaining rewarding.
Give experienced players a chance to have a go at teaching -
\- create more teachers, out of the available pool.
\- allow them the chance to follow the teaching process right through (at least to a certain point), which isn't always achievable, otherwise, as newcommers gain advice from all over.
\- help them to see the fun side of helping new players.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:15 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:51:48 by Yusou Bhoroi
Ensuring that competitors are truely my new to the game,
\- with past competitions, there, has been a cutoff date
\- using people from real life can work, but then it removes a lot of the in-game benefits benefits (new playerbase recruiting areas, et.cetera.)
\- even if it had official ways of checking, it'd still not be certain.
Timezone/playtime differences can cause great difficulties, even when specifically choosing to match.
Finding teams, both trainers and trainees, who can fit together (for all sorts of reasons) can be hard.
Ensuring an even playing field at the start.
It has a small immediate impact, and most of the effects are subject to many possible hurdles, over a long maturation time.
There would be little interest without an 'angle' to make it relatable/appealing.
Getting a balance for incentive vs risk of cheating.
Having the teams do streams, and (blog*?) updates on progress, could help give a wider audience for the competition, to make it more interesting/followable/relatable.
\- both sides of the teams may be of interest, though the perspective of the trainees will likely be the most engaging.
\- this would give a clearer idea of what is involved in competing in some of these activities, at the 'higher levels', and help make it more interesting.
\- making sure that any materials for learning are made clear, should mean that any who are inspired by the competition can easily try taking up the activities for themselves.
A possible way of spinning it, would be to invite (or even challenge) prominent players, who are either famous for being good at RuneScape, or good at explaining content (or both), to try their hands at some of the 'lesser' parts of content, to see whether they can master them, too (after all, if you're supposed to be good at RuneScape as a whole, then finding out you're a relative novice at whole sections, must be something needing rectifying! ).
28-Mar-2015 09:51:16 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:52:14 by Yusou Bhoroi
\-these players tend to be on more, so they would be more likely to be able to fit in the training time, is they so wished.
\-it may still be hard to ensure a level playing, but perhaps that would matter less... it's hard to tell what the main focus would be, and that may depend, to a certain extent, upon who takes part, and what they would be willing to accept.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:16 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:52:39 by Yusou Bhoroi
This would be similar, but would involve members of the CM team participating in the competition, as the 'new' players. This would have the advantages of being a big draw, and having the established systems available that allow for communication, and fairness.
Such a challenge, taken on by Mods, has a precedent, in a way, with things like the Super September challenges, and some of the past CM undertakings, which pit teams of Mods against each other. These have a history of being popular, well set out, and having just the right degree of humour to lighten up the proceedings, while still remaining serious - something players may find hard to do, in the same way.. pokes about eachothers' skill, would likely be taken as insult, whereas with Mods it's understood as good natured.
With it being Mods involved, it would make it more likely to make it through the process, and mean that it'd be the same people exploring all the different pieces of content, in sequence, allowing for more interesting comparisons, and interactions to develope. It would also allow a more direct and useful analysis of the content to happen, giving JAGEX a more in-depth insight into pieces of content, to see and understand what may help it in future updates (however far off they may be), while giving communities the assurance that Mods actually take interest, know what the content means, and even perhaps the comfort of knowing that someone at JAGEX actually cares for 'their' own piece of content, and would stand up for it, in the future.
This version, while it seems a lot to ask, wouldn't involve more input that a lot of the standard formats would do, if they were to be fair, and well run, and could have the advantage of fulfilling far more of the possible advantageous criteria that any competition could do.
I hope to outline the various advantages, and ways it can benefit the content (along with possible problems), over the next couple of posts.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:17 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:53:14 by Yusou Bhoroi
(This focuses on disadvantages avoided)
With any standard format competition, there will be numerous things that cause them to take up large amounts of time, from both the CM team and any other organisers, not least - all the match ups, the length of time taken to complete the tournament, ensuring fairness, and making sure everyone can participate (each of these things involve many subsidiary concerns, and there are other things too); but the main problems, even if you had the time to invest into all that, are:
That all that effort would be very much 'back room', while actually remaining front seat..
All that involvement, and yet very little of it is noticeable, and CM presence would not be participatory, unless they dedicated even more time, to actually take part, too..
It achieves very little in the way of highlighting how the activity works, or what can be done to improve the content, other than what has already been provided by regular players :- no first hand knowledge, experience, or insight.
Because of the backseat aspect of the participation, it would do little to encourage player participation outside the normal groups for those activities, without giving them anything tangible gained by the process. On top of that, it fails to highlight the competitive aspects of the activities, while remaining 'dry' and boring for those not participating.
Any coverage in streams, or reporting on the events, would be restricted to straight on-looking, and would miss out the majority of the competition, while containing little more to inspire people, or explain what is going on, even if they chose to watch.
If you compare this to the advantages outlined in the opening post for this format, and the following post, then it should be reasonably clear why the Mod training format could prove to be one of, if not the best, option to choose from, out of the ideas so far, if it were decided to try a competitive venture.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:17 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:53:38 by Yusou Bhoroi
This, along with the popularization of streaming and challenges, makes it likely that such a format would prove of interest, if handled correctly - something which the CM team are more than capable of doing, with their expertise (providing they have the time, ofc).
The fact that it is the Mods who are competing, in essence, allows them to be in control of the situation, to an extent, and prevents some of the tensions that may be caused by direct competition - any possible ructions caused in other forms of tournament, would be player to player matters, and likely without the presence of Moderators; and, while that's not something unusual in a game, it's better to avoid it, if possible, than not.
This allows those who love the activities the most, and have the wish to share the fun aspects of competitive play, to highlight their content - both to Mods, and to the general playerbase, in the most positive way. It gives the opportunity to explain how the content works, and increase the awareness of this to people who would otherwise not have had the incentive to find out.
The degree in which competitive play is an important part of an activity, can easily dictate the tone of the competition done for each individual activity.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:18 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:53:59 by Yusou Bhoroi
This form could precede player/community run competitions, or events, as it works as a good way to highlight the content, and get others keyed to try it out themselves; explaining all they need to know for how to participate in the content competitively (as well as just general ideas for how to enjoy the content), while at the same time making sure they know the content is valued, and that JAGEX is aware of any problems it faces (they'll have seen Mods go through the process of experiencing it all).
It could work very well as a stand-alone thing, for each piece of content, too.
It's highly adaptable, to allow it to be used for may kinds of content.
I'll break off there, for tidying up and filling in some of the previous things. As a lot of the advantages of the format are obvious, it won't help to bang on too much about it, and there may be other formats available which are even better, or more convenient.
I hope it is something that could be considered, anyway, and I'll get back to filling in more detail + tidying it up, once the rest has been filled.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:19 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:54:20 by Yusou Bhoroi
(As the specifics become more developed, I'll start using this as a contents, to link to separate posts - at the moment, it's merely a list of activities it would easily work for, or be adapted for ((it's limited to basic feasibility, and usefulness to the activities of such a venture, till there's any reason to hope it might be something acceptable)).
This could even be adapted for things like bosses.. but that's already popular, covered elsewhere, and something people have enough pressure to try out as it is.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:19 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 10:09:18 by Yusou Bhoroi
(Some quite detailed notes left, though I'm not so good with translating them).
However, the organiser had to give up playing RuneScape (they had terminal illness), so there haven't been any more open-run attempts, so far (though we'd love to try, and it'd work better either with help, or in the 2nd format, to encourage more players).
28-Mar-2015 09:51:20 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:57:08 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Has players who are willing (and eager) to teach new players (and likely wishing to take part in a joint effort, if that's possible).
- Is one of the more complex and interesting minigames, with many established tactics, and ways of countering them, to learn ~ so would fit the full structure very well.
- Suffers a lot from glitches ~ so experiencing how they effect gameplay would help with finding solutions, or at least making workarounds known, so people can play if they wish to.
- Is often boosted, rather than played * so could really benefit from a trend for playing.
- Already has a fairly good point giving, and high score system.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:21 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:57:30 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Has dedicated teaching groups, and many veterans who could be encouraged into valuing newer players, given the right cues (many help out sporadically, but can give in to peer pressure from those who don't, given a situation where it is seen as worthwhile, many would likely take up the opportunity, which would allow a more self-sustaining group of newer players to establish).
- Is incredibly complex for the time allotted for decisions, when all the mechanics are taken into account when playing (even more so, when you go into the theory, and add-ons.. though the depth into which some of these things would be explored, wouldn't be to that extent, most likely) ~ ideal target for helping people discover the intricacies of content, and (dare I say it) the worth of exploring it, and taking it on as a challenge.
- There aren't many game-impacting problems in the playing mechanics (only very minor ones, or ones which impact newer players more, but are game-wide issues), but there are many problems with the reward system ~ which could best be experienced in context, and thus allow user perspective on which fixes are likely to work best and how best to structure the rewards to encourage play.
- Is often played as 5050, rather than competitively (or rather: people come with the preexisting intention to do that, and have to be teased out of it to come to try, and thus enjoy the content) ~ so would benefit greatly from encouragements for playing.
- Lacks a highscores, so more (and official) ways to play competitively would be of benefit. The reward allocation system is somewhat broken, as it rewards non-play more than play, when taken as an average, or when starting out (and thus forms habbits/lack of willingness to try). Giving people a reason to try (playing) the game would be of help in encouraging this to happen.
28-Mar-2015 09:51:21 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 09:57:49 by Yusou Bhoroi
- Has an active fanbase, who enjoy playing it, and are willing to help those who are new, if they wish to play; however it suffers from tensions caused by those wanting to go there to not-play, and their negative impacts upon those trying to play.
- Has many tactics, and things to help with gameplay, and (as with the other games mentioned so far) very few people are aware of them, or how fun the game can be to play ~ thus it's a good candidate, as people being more aware of what's involved, and how fun that can be, would likely encourage some to take part; showing that their is an art behind it, will draw those who like to perfect skills.
- Numerous problems which have never been addressed, along with some minor ergonomic 'failings', though many of those actually add to the intricacies of play ~ to really understand which are which, and what to do to repair things, requires a good understanding of how the game works, what's enjoyable about it, and what it feels like to play it both for fun, and competition.
- Many of those commuting to the game, do so without the intention of trying it ~ showing the value of the game, and the depth of fun in it, could encourage more to try.
- The game has suffered from most rewards being too quickly obtainable, since they were decedecimated, along with few return incentives. The point system is also skewed away from rewarding complete play ~ the best ways to improve this, could be best found by experiencing the content fully, and in a competitive spirit.
needing to concentrate on other things, so will redo these sections when more time.
(Can do competitive scouting/tagging races, as are done by some groups.. techniques could be taught before the competition, though this would likely be a short one, it's hard to know. Will try asking around )
- Has a fanbase who play just for fun, and have a great tolerance of those wishing to play too, there seem (this is just going by my own experiences, and that of a couple of firends; though I'm well aware that single experiences can be misleading!) to be fewer here willing to share knowledge, though ~ so encouragement for helping others may well promote that.
- There are quite a diverse range of tactics used, and little extras that few seem aware of, many of which could be helpful to know, if explained well ~ so following the teaching process would help make people aware of them, and see what fun it can be to play, perhaps encouraging the willingness to try it out.
- There a quite a lot of problems with the game, with various glitches, and a few problems with the overall mechanics (turn 'glitch' being one of the most serious, in that it's impossible for those who experience it to play fairly, as it's a game-engine or rendering problem, which makes it obvious who is a player and who isn't. It isn't their fault, but it means they actively have to ignore it to allow actual gameplay) ~ detailed experience of these problems could lead to sollutions.
- Suffers from non-play being more 'efficient' than play ~ encouragement to try, and extolling the values of, active play, could lead to a change in general attitudes, and thus more using the time to have fun, even when going for xp.
- The rewards are already very good, however there could be something done to r*tweak the balancing, to allow play to be at least as efficient as non-play * which would be easier with a full understanding of all the ways it can be used.
28-Mar-2015 10:00:26 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 10:02:03 by Yusou Bhoroi
Many companies have sports, or gaming teams, whether competing internally, or externally - RuneScape has ready made opportunities, in house, and on tap! Making use of them might encourage others to do the same.
As far as the ideas proposed here are concerned, who wouldn't want to be paid to have fun? .. especially when you can have great effect, and be doing a great job, by doing so?
(Sorry for being cheeky, it's well meant )
While allowing non-imperitive play to be rewarded in competitive contents is, in some ways, an understandable policy, where it impacts negatively upon those who wish to try the content, as has been the case in every minigames it's been done with, so far, then this is both unfair, and a waste of content.
This is especially so when it is both easier, and more rewarding (either entirely, or by effort put in), to occupy the content, but not use it.
Problems self perpetuate, and expand themselves, as they encourage culture and mindset of not using, or not trying content.. and those who do want to play, know they have little chance of being able to, so don't try.
The best way to find a compromise that will work (rewarding competition, without penalising newcomers, or forcing them into non-participant forms), while being fair to all, is to truely experience all the forms of play. This way would have the benefit of giving awareness of, and encouragement for, content usage, and the benefits and values of doing so.
Even without any content changes coming from this, the awareness and value-giving aspects of such a project would be more than worth it (as far as I can see).
28-Mar-2015 10:00:47 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 10:03:15 by Yusou Bhoroi
While far more such things still exist, and would only be 'contacted' with deeper use, it's good to see that first hand experience really helps in understanding problems, in whatever way they are come to. As I've said, in my opinion, even without this hope, the many of their benefits would warrant some such programme (or the variations mooted), even if each were taken individually, so I really think that some form of deep/exhaustive-contact fuselage of the content, would prove benificial on so many levels, and make either content, or culture (or both!), at the end of it, which would be the best in RuneScape.
-is totally biased- :
Once it's known whether/how much support from CM team would be available, then I can set about approaching those interested in helping with such things, and the formation of setups for the best ways to do whichever is chosen (if any) for each activity.
"Be different from a purely exploratory, or casual event, having set participants, a formal structure, and an end goal. This can help benefit more casual events, too, as it can make sure that both groups of playstyles can be catered for, without upsetting the other."
-> How can both groups humans liking different playstyles (structured and casual) be catered for by structured events? : o
"While this has tried to split up the groups of competitors fairly, and make sure all can take part, its size, and inclusion of more casual players, or those who don't use the available sources to keep up with rounds, has meant it has become unwieldy, and is taking a very long time to complete."
-> Very true... D :
"Prevent the outcome being a forgone conclusion"
-> Important point. : o In GOP-case, this would be putting Icy and Tommi (and Ali, if he would participate) in their own league and letting us inferior humans hack at each other without interference.. : p
"To take a different approach to competition, or have an intriguing and lesser used format."
-> In GOP-case, at least, being unusual seems to decrease interest among those who love the usual case. Folks who love run-GOP may even feel like they are betraying their identity if they affiliate with walk-GOP (this can be the case with many dichotomies that have different groups of humans liking different sides).
"[Disadvantage with elimination-tournament:] Discludes new players, unless it takes form of permanent ranking system, which is an enormous undertaking."
-> Might be usefwl to mention why this is so. If I guess correctly, it is because newcomlings will come at the bottom of such a system without opportunity to take the humiliation as an instruction to get better for the next round, since there is no next round.
28-Mar-2015 10:04:54 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 10:11:07 by Yusou Bhoroi
Allowing all-comers to participate, but having separate sub-competitions for different groups, either by ability, community, or other."
Humans don't know what "all-comers" means, so it should be clarified. Allcomlings is a combination of newcomlings and oldcomlings and various humans who refuse to be categorised.
"Having the teams do streams, and (blog*?) updates on progress, could help give a wider audience for the competition, to make it more interesting/followable/relatable. [...] A possible way of spinning it, would be to invite (or even challenge) prominent players, who are either famous for being good at RuneScape, or good at explaining content (or both)"
Good idea. : o I don't see other ways of accomplishing it; and this way is promising.
Is the ''standard'' way of playing GOP boring? Aren't all the experienced goppers playing GOP in some non-standard way? So, when we say ''GOP is fun!'' regular-humans think we mean ''gathering tokken is fun!'' while we actually mean ''finding ways to score as many orbs as possible is fun!'' Scoring orbs for the sake of scoring orbs, or scoring orbs in order to beat your opponent, are not goals that the regular-human thinks GOP is about.
28-Mar-2015 10:04:55 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 10:11:41 by Yusou Bhoroi
1: Because other playstyles are already catered for, at present, by the other events, and people going there to take it 'serriously' are likely often making others feel uncomfortable, when they're just there to relax and lark about. Having places where each can do what they wish, without impacting the other, is a good compromise - perhaps each will then grow to appreciate eachothers' playstyles more, when their not seeing mixed events as the only possible way to get to play.
2: That's what I never get about the other groups.. so quick to criticise in a non-constructive way, and get angry with new ppl.. yet they're extremely disorganised and unwilling to play much, themselves.. has taken a lot of getting used to. :c
3: You'd have a fair chance of beating Finsk-Tommi, or Ali, in the right circumstances, and I'm hoping that others may come out of the woodwork, if there was any such tournament.. but I'd rather it was focussed on showing newer players that the competitive side can be fun, welcoming, and worthwhile.. You know as well as I do, that many who come, wish to play more, but get put off by a few of the less pleasant/welcoming players, or by not having 100s of people at a similar stage who are there to play with. (That, and the fact that there's very little reward to stay on for).
4: I think that varies, from group to group.. and often newer players, and those who help out most, seem to enjoy trying new things, too.. it's more those who feel they have something to prove, who are really anti unusual things.
5: Having an accurate and ongoing highscore system, is a big undertaking, as most new players change rapidly, and are unable to keep in touch with admins, with some systems - automating takes a lot of the effort away, but then you have to have one which can detect different playforms and circumstances, et.cetera.
6: Allcomers is an Americanism - it just means all who turn up, regardless of ability.
7: Ja, though there are problems even with that - needs to be people who'll appeal to all players (whether individually, or between the teams), and they need to be folks who are willing to spend the time at the games (all of them, so it's a follow-through process).. which would amount to a lot of playtime.
8?: Boring to watch - and I don't just mean for GOP. If there's nothing inherrantly exciting, relatable, or understandable (a majority of the strategies and techniques that are used, won't be), then people will not watch it. It needs to be something that all, or at least the majority (and the majority won't have seriously tried the minigames competitively), will find appealing, and easy to follow - the teaching process, along with relating to other humans doing it, is precisely that.
I think that with GOP (and some other minigames), reward isn't directly related to effort, or skill (in fact, in some ways, it's the opposite), which is the problem - you get rewarded for avoiding playing it, more than you do for actually playing it.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback; it's still unfinished, but hope I'll be able to work things in with greater clarity.
I finally managed to find the time to jump through it all and quite a lot of the ideas seem decent to me.
I have to mention that, in the same way as you use your experience from GOP, I will use my experience from FoG to better imagine some things.
The problem here is getting players together for the competition. From my experience scheduled tournaments usually do not go as planned (except for Clan Wars for some reason). The "train a JMod" variant clearly has an advantage here, as the competitors have better ways of communicating with Jagex
Some minigames probably don't need the competition to be held at a certain time. The GOP competition could even be similar to seasonal highscores - a player signs up for an apprenticeship, and at the end of the given time period the player goes through one or several supervised games and the highest scores count.
+less demanding for the competitors' schedule
-defending couldn't be a part of this competition - no player interaction
-brings less thrill to those who'd want to watch the games
If there was a FoG competition, direct confrontation would be needed (and thus all the match-scheduling stuff). Also, with the importance of combat stats in the minigame, games between JMods/prominent players would be much fairer - you cannot expect a level 40 to beat a level 126 when they are both trying their best to win and when they both have been teached what to do.
Things that should be added alongside with these competitions:
*training grounds (a way to enter the minigame with just 2 people - rewards would be restricted)
*a way to observe the minigame arena (would have to be restricted in FoG's case since people could point out their friends' opponents' location)
Oops, I have somehow skipped the "workarounds" part... some parts of this posts are probably just repeating what has been said there.
It's good to see that the benefits aren't entirely in my head (), though we'll have to wait and see whether, and what what sort of thing C.M. may be willing to support. I've passed the qfc and explanations to some in the Conq teaching circles (not got to most, yet), and poked a little towards discussions with competitive Heist players, but am unsure of how far to ask people (yet), because of not wishing to get people's hopes up (or indeed waste their time on reusability and adaptations, at this stage - even if we could muddle through a less-benificial, and less well run version for ourselves, at a later date).
However, all and any feedback would be helpful, as it can assist with choosing and designing the tournaments; show solidarity and determination; and give better ideas.
When we've got all groups on board, and have deliberated a basic format, I think a dedicated thread, with proper sections for each group (oh' the joys of being able to link to individual posts - should allow that to be manageable with several section posters), would work better in explaining the format, along with how it applies to each activity, and the benefits it could bring (whichever type is chosen).
Until I know what/if support can be given, and for which forms, then it's hard to design a thread to cater for it, as they're very different in organisation (even though there are similar aspects in common, they have to be in different places and forms). Not wishing to poke too many folks, at this stage, if there won't be support, as even if we can get a bodged version for ourselves, it would need a lot more groundwork done before incorporating groups (needs to get streamers, and ways of doing it unobtrusively and low-demanding; competers organised and formalised - which would take a lot to fit in varying groups to the timetables of a few people with the same times.. and long term availability and willingness; et.cetera.) which is built-in if CM.
Forum and Wiki usage needs to be done right, too (need to promote the JAGEXWiki >:
Not wishing to make then hurry decisions, but just trying to get as much useful stuff done as possible (most things differ too much in execution, depending on outcome, to do before, so 'doing them' wouldn't be useful).
Anywhu, there may be a few empty posts, for a couple of pages, as I test outlines of stuff for spacing, before editing out.
- Explaining and detailing what the competition from is, and how to set about setting one up.
- 'Recruiting' various activities' communities to assist CM, where appropriate (some forms require whole groups' cooperation, whereas others merely that of a few organisers).
- Establishing the duration and organisation for each tournament, based on prospective participation, and form of competition.
- Space for rules, details on timing*, requirements, contacting, listing participants, responses, keeping track of outcomes, and so on (for some competition forms, it will be necessary to have separate threads for the formation, and the actual live thread) , for each individual activity. Spacing for which varies too much between forms and activities.
Having looked at various competitions, and looked into different ways of presenting the different possible forms, none of the sections abovementioned seem to have enough crossover, other than in extra-necessary formatting - such as uniform (or indeed, diverse, where distinction between various activities is needed) titling, colouring, bulleting.
It's therefore impossible to do much, without at least knowing which form I should be making an example for.. doing multiple forms isn't doable, with the amount of free time I have (it'd take nigh on a Year, to do all possible forms of those already described, with disregarding other uses I need to put that time to - though I may be getting more free time, soon.. a lot is semi-free, and I can multitask some things, but not others).
A compromise would be to choose one form, the form which would be the choice for independent adaptation, and make an outline for that - at least so far as supported and independent versions overlap (and that, in itself, is very limiting). At least then, something is being done, and hopefully won't be useless in the long run.
Other feedback has been given by a few individual activity groups, on their respective threads. I'll have to ask if I may quote them across, when I've tidied up what's here.
Think I managed to miss out all the off-topic stuff, but will re-check, and edit out some of the more in-group rantings.
(and in middle of reading it through to tidy it up a bit more, keep getting distracted by work/chat/dog)
How are you?
Things are ok, here, thank you.
I'd not heard of the Rugby Championship, before clicking the link in your sig. :
Always loved player-initiative games (and play, in general - as long as its not just for gain ), although I've not had so much time for such things, since Gop came out.. and even less, in the 2 Years since the help chat opened up to allowing open-world folks in (which caused almost all the helpers from the groups I'd always played with, before, to stop helping, due to mostly to tensions and different attitudes between the two meta-groups; though also partially because the main runner and proponent for intergration, in our group, ceased comming online due to long term illness).
I've come across the PoH league, which uses gnomeballs, which is the only other regular ball game that I know of, which still runs.. there were a couple which used the cabbage for kicking races, and before that, the skull kicky-thing.
There are lots of good H&S/survival challanges, which the Gop meta group I'm part of, did a lot of, before Gop, and likely many others.
I'd just love it if JAGEX would encourage such play, and such use of their content (though what I proposed was geared towards prescribed use of Minigame content, it would be great if it could be applied further!) competitively. Its a real shame to see such content sidelined, die out.. at get strangled into such positions largely by the 'games' being flooded with either bots, or non-playing occupiers, who prevent folks from playing, meeting up with new folks, and end up with (the games) encouraging such to the point that people come with pre-concieved intentions not to play the games, and refuse to even try.. :/
While I don't want folks who'd rather afk content, to be prevented from having content they can afk (or even from being able to do 'active' content, less actively - so long as it doesnt impact negatively on normal play, and isn't more rewarding
- even on average, or for new players, than active playing of the content.. after all it is active content), I would like it if they would encourage clactive play more, especially in this extra content. After all, there is already plenty of afk content.
I love the communities that revolve around playing auch content sporadically, just for fun diversion, and an delighted by how much work CM has been doing to provide a structure for regular opportunities to do this (both for ready-made content, and in improvised events), and wouldn't wish for any competitive, or explorative, play events to impact upon the hosting of such events.
The aim is to come up with a way to help encourage a more diverse range of playstyles, and make them a valid way of approaching the game, again, instead of being funnelled into one way of playing the game. Closing the gaps which have opened up, between the different playforms, and rebalancing the emphasis away from juat the one approach and outlook.
If such can be done in a way which will be popular, whilst giving the chance to find out ways to improve upon any structured parts of this content, yet still making sure it keeps its character, mechanics, and uniqueness.. and highlight the more player-devised play, then all the better!
(Has lost what the subject of the lqst paragraph was, in my head.. and not really happy with the wording of what was recalled.. but had better leave it like that, or I'll risk going into a complete rambling meldown, and never shut up, or get to the point. I hope it's legible. )
28-Mar-2015 21:28:59 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 21:31:36 by Yusou Bhoroi
28-Mar-2015 21:33:55 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 21:35:36 by Yusou Bhoroi
Multipost glitch seems to be terrible, on this device, atm.. press post, wait 2mins, nothing happens.. load page in another tab to check, nothing.. press post again - nothing.. press, sokethijg starts happening, and 15 seconds later, it loads... aaand there's three posts.. none of which are timestamped from when you pressed post.
28-Mar-2015 21:33:58 - Last edited on 28-Mar-2015 21:43:51 by Yusou Bhoroi
If active content is approached from an active perspective, then any adaptions or improvements to it, will benefit it as being active content (rather than turning into non-active content, and causing its decline in the process).
A lot of focus is given to achievements in other aspects of the game, and yet little, to no, focus is given to that in areas which are deliberately structured around competition and achievement. This deprives them of 'value', for many (though I wish that wasn't so), which leads to fewer using them for that, and more using it for other gain, even at the expence of removing fun.. and this in turn, leads to a focus on adapting the content to suit this playstyle (which is already catered for, in far more numerous ways, elsewhere in the game), to the detriment of both the fun in the content, and those who wish to play actively. It would be simpler to take the other solution, of encouraging the active play, in active content, and therefore catering to those who wish to play actively, also.
Communities are the key to the success of most content, and such communities can thrive best, when there are varied areas of focus, and many playstyles catered for, and encouraged, in different pieces of content.
The FC I spoke of, is still there, and running (though not as well as it used to, when run by the parent metagroup), and both metagroups are still arround (the one I come from, is based off-site, and was around pre-RuneScape, so there's not much chance of it splitting up.. but it does tend to make most in it value the community in the group, over the bother of intergrating outside of it,
Edit: My posts were in reply to Wobble, and the 2nd is a continuation of the 1st. (Not able to get coppy-paste to work on this device, atm, so couldn't add this to 1st post).
29-Mar-2015 13:33:12 - Last edited on 29-Mar-2015 13:38:34 by Yusou Bhoroi
I agree that much of the content falls down in being 'welcoming' to newcommers, often either putting them off using it, or prompting them to seek exploitetive ways of using it (which is a contagious attitude.. spreading via them, to other folks, who've yet to try the game).
My view, is that the best way to see how it fails to work in encouraging more players to play it, and in letting them access the fun it can provide, is done by following the process if groups who play the game actively already (and thus know it in depth), and who actively try to encourage new players to enjoy it, in fun environments (thereby being familiar with exactly what it is that encourages people to try it, what it is that newcommers find fun, when they do enjoy it, and what supports or adaptations may be needed to help the process of fun content being experienced in a way that allows access to the fun), rather than those who don't, and already have pre-concieved ideas about wanting to avoid it, and will just suggest more ways to allow them to bypass the content.
Ways to bypass already exist (though, in truth, are unnecessary, as it is 'extra-curricular' content, and you opt to go there), and should, if anything, be tonned down, even if ways to encourage active play, are introduced.. as they are often presently more beneficial to new players who play without a support system, or are so on average. They should be a less efficient way of obtaining the rewards, even when the rewards are a secondary focus.
In a way, listening only to those who don't wish to play the content, or wish to avoid it while gaining, leads to a similar situation to the Wishingwell bush, and high level farming seeds - the bush gives a set value of prize, in seeds, so the more seeds there are, the more the prices decrease, and the more seeds it gives to equal the value. All it does, is end up with no one playing the content for fun, having been actively discouraged from doing.
29-Mar-2015 13:51:51 - Last edited on 29-Mar-2015 13:58:11 by Yusou Bhoroi
The middle ground, of encouraging achivement, without stamping on those who are new, is better; but even better than that, you can actively encourage, and nuture, fun, and active play at the same time.
The groups who best represent that, are those that aim to do just that. Although I still feel strongly that a working knowlege of the content, ammongst at least some part of the Staff, is immensely benificial, and has evidently been so in the past. So gaining this, in a way that also encourages active use, highlights the communities involved in sidelined content, and is seen to be active community engaugement, seems like a win-win(-win) situation, to me.
How was the weekend? :o
(Good luck with the Firemaking, btw! )
Thinking of finding a way to transfer something that was RS-wiki-based, back to forums, somehow, then setting up some regular events for it. Not quite sure of the best way to format it, so that it can work, but I suppose it doesn't have to be a foolproof system, as long as it works reasonably well.
I hope the questing goes well, and you have fun!
Had no idea, lol.
I did think you might be, a long time back, but disregarded it due to the vastly different posting-style (at least from my, obviously incorrect, viewpoint, lol).
Congrats to you both!
Everyone been having a good week, so far?
I found out how troll-y big sharks were, with this, as I got 4 within a few 100k xp, yet had over 30m xp accross the other accs, without getting one.. very much crazy over that, lol.
I hope you manage to get it transferred.
Very well worded, from a communication point of view, but my brain immdiately thought: 'Ah, I'd better leave my wits behind, then..'
-leaves cookie out for Clam-
Have something to discuss with.