#1 21.01.2018 23:27:05

Corbeau
Player
Posts: 766

So...

This happened on Discord and is not the only such quote:

Lexxie, 1/18/2018, 11:00:43 PM wrote:

This is a chance for wieder, who has been living in a very small isolationist community of longturn.org for a long time, to realise that over there the amateur ruleset changes turned into a kind of 'inbred' culture from the unfortunate circumstance of having too few people to debate these things and not enough other experts give dissenting opinions.  Let's not gang up on him too much, but I do encourage him to realise that ages of thinking within that little trapped community might have led him to get some bad habits in thinking about rulesets and game design

Ladies and gentlemen, please rise for the Longturn anthem big_smile

Offline

#2 22.01.2018 19:38:40

Caedo
Player
From: Germany
Posts: 62

Re: So...

So, er... did anyone who's been playing here for a while and possibly has a proper perspective consider whether or not any of those accusations could actually be true?

Offline

#3 22.01.2018 20:04:26

cgalik
Player
From: Chicago
Posts: 277

Re: So...

I'm not sure on the purpose of Corbeau's post? Corbeau, maybe you could elaborate?

Yes, I've "been playing here for a while" (7 years) and can say a few things.
1) wieder is great
2) anyone else want to admin a game, I'm pretty sure they can.
3) wieder is fun
4) Yes, we do not have a big community, never have had one.
5) I'm not sure what "professional" rulesets would be? People play LT for money? tongue
6) wieder listens to any and everybody and is constantly asking for feedback and incorporates changes. Not much comes at times.
7) LT37, LT38 and LT39 I have played (or playing) and have not have had any exploits and been absolutely great LT games. He also has not actually played in LT38/LT39, but selflessly admin'd them without even playing. I think he fooled around with LT40, which is an experimental'ish game.
8) We used to vote on every change and it got to be a complete mess. We'd have polls contradict one another and then more polls and more time... it was slow, and inefficient and did not result in better games.
9) wieder is cool
10) I'm not president of the wieder fan club, but that's only because one doesn't exist (yet). smile

Just my 2 cents.

Offline

#4 22.01.2018 20:32:45

Corbeau
Player
Posts: 766

Re: So...

Oh, just in case it isn't clear, I definitely disagree both with the direction of the comment I copied and with most of the statements made there.

The purpose was informing the community about how it is being mentioned on another semi-public channel where a related community is gathering. Not really significant, but when someone mentions me, I gladly receive all information about the mention, regardless if the mention is favourable, infavourable, true, flase, honest or dishonest. Just... it's fair to be informed.

So, not really important. Consider this the "gossip section". Basically, the same urge that made the blonde walk into a bar holding a piece of shit in her hand, showing it to everybody and saying "Look what I almost stepped into!" tongue

And this was DEFINITELY not about Wieder. I just realised that passing this comment on may have actually caused some discomfort on him and if this is the case, I genuinely apologise. The possibility didn't even occur to me. I consider that comments like these say much, much more about the person who makes them than about the person, or the community, that is addressed by it.

.
.
.
That said...
.
.
.

I *would* like the community to become a bit bigger. This is why I started the Facebook page, been pulling sleeves for months to make some sense of the front page, been asking about the minor reorganization of the forum... To no avail. Some ten LTs ago the game had 70 players. The last two have less than 30. Isn't anyone bothered by this?

Offline

#5 22.01.2018 20:47:22

Corbeau
Player
Posts: 766

Re: So...

Caedo, could you be more specific if you believe some of the things said by Lexxie cold be true.

My criticism may be that, regarding accepting other people's ideas about rulesets, Wieder *may* be a bit thick on the ears sometimes and there were - and will be - a number of occasions when I disagreed with him about some game aspect. But then again, when he creates the ruleset and admins a game, everything good and bad that comes out of it is his responsibiilty: if the game flops, it will be "Wieder's game" that flopped, so I completely understand why he is reluctant to let in other ideas that may mess up his concept. I would probably do the same.

However, having seen that my ideas were not met with undivided cheer, I took up the effort of creating my ruleset and offered my vision to the community and, unless there is wide dissent, the game that starts in 3 months will be "mine". Everybody is free to do the same. If someone doesn't have the knowledge, I will gladly assist. If someone doesn't have the time or is unwilling to make the effort, well, tough luck.

Offline

#6 23.01.2018 20:26:15

Caedo
Player
From: Germany
Posts: 62

Re: So...

Here's the thing: I can try to translate / elaborate based on what I know, but I'm afraid at the core of all of this lies something that I simply can't make judgments about, for lack of expertise regarding the game itself.

A couple of months back, when some new LT games reared their heads, I wound up discussing strategy with Lexxie to hopefully get better myself. Current versions of the rulesets for those games were already up, so we took a look at those. Now, at this point, I can't make any calls as to the actual quality of various strategies and truthfulness of certain theses, but the basic gist was that while the multiplayer ruleset (as shipped with Freeciv) is delicately balanced (for the most part), so that at most points there isn't a single best solution, but multiple different courses of action with different strengths and weaknesses, the rulesets used here basically reduced diversity in different viable courses of action, penalizing certain game paths and favoring others, as well as reducing depth by removing entire features (such as rapture). The first part of this statement (multiplayer ruleset allowing for different viable strategies) is evidenced by the fact that the person saying it is one of the top players over there; the second part is for the experienced players here to judge – are there actually completely different completely viable courses of action at multiple points throughout the game?

In general, I think it's quite possible that at some points, a certain change was made. However, that change led to an exploit, or simply something counter-intuitive that the majority of players didn't like, so it was made impossible, thus reducing the amount of possibly courses of action. This might have happened multiple times, in general giving more power to things the majority of the players liked and weakening or disabling things a majority of players disliked. Any players that disagreed eventually lost interest and left, further increasing the power of the majority; thus leading to a form of "inbred culture". Undoing something like this seems hard, since multiple changes have to be made at the same time to add that complexity back in without creating imbalance.
This is, of course, only speculation, but it seems plausible in its own right.

Again, some of these are matters that I'm not too knowledgable about – you'll either have to reflect on this, or discuss it with Lexxie directly. I may have misinterpreted or misremembered some things here.

Offline

#7 23.01.2018 23:09:24

wieder
Administrator
Posts: 1,545

Re: So...

One of the biggest problems with the multiplayer ruleset and with the LT rulesets comes in the form of people allying and making one of them the science engine. The science person is protected by the others and will build no military units of very few of those during the mid game. This may allow that one player to become super powerful compared to the others and you know how that will end. Of course this strategy is not foolproof and it's not that easy to implement. However if it succeeds...

With the LT rulesets there are less of ways to get rich fast. At least compared to the others.

With rapture growth and tech trading doing that is so much more easy to do. And also start. To simplify this: Create an alliance, let one of the players rush for republic and you are on the route to rapture. 10 turns after getting republic you may have 2x powerful nations compared to those who played well but didn't have allies.

The idea kind of was to make it less about trading and more about managing the nation. That's for the tech trading part. Something is of course lost when this happens, so now we have another attempt with a new idea for tech trading with LT40. Standard Freeciv mechanics are not used but there is a way to trade techs.

Now rapture is another beast and was simply removed because it made the rich even more rich and the poor... well it just left them poor. But in the early game. It takes not that much time to get to republic. Instead there is rapture like but less powerful method of growth with granaries. There are similar downsides to using celebrations. There is also the need to use lux and figure out how to use lux if you want big cities.

Those were at least the ideas for how it was supposed to work. Was there some strategy that was not possible or usable with the LT rulesets? I've considered food/celebration growth like the same strategy but with a slightly different implementation. Someone might have a different view on this.

Some players have succeeded with focusing on military, some on science and some on economy. Using the lux was usually included on all those strategies, at least when someone was trying to maximize military or economy. Celebration trade bonus with high lux is available on LT games and also probably one of the hardest ways to win and it's rarely used while really powerful.

There is actually one thing about LT40 and rapture that was briefly talked about but not added to the game. There was this idea of adding celebration growth with the new LT40 government nationalism. There would have been some historical background to that and it might have provided a new approach to the rapture feature. For several reasons this was at least postponed and not included to the game. If implemented nationalism would have been the only government with the rapture growth. Several reasons why not added for LT40...

Maybe best to say never say never. Some of the features may return and probably will return but the games are really different if there are 5, 30 or 150 players.

Anyway, if there is some strategy that can't be used, please let us know and we will try to figure out how it might work without breaking the game smile

Offline

#8 23.01.2018 23:55:45

Corbeau
Player
Posts: 766

Re: So...

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE REPLYING

So, in order to get more ideas, more opinions and more experts, I coped some aspects of this thread to Freciv forum. You can find it here.

http://forum.freeciv.org/f/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=89865

Wieder, it would be extremely helpful if you would close this topic (if that is technically possible) because it is better if a discussion is lead in one place. Besides, this is a matter of relation of LT with the "outside world", so it would be good if the outside world gets a good glimpse of the ideas and their rationalisation.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB