GoH Book III

[ZCerberus]

21 hours ago, mccoyed said:

Fair points re: Varlyrio. I agree with Grover that it would be nice to see all 5 opened up.

If we had similar interest in all five, I would think so- but Nocty was least populous in Books I and II.  It has lots of potential, but alas we have few stalwarts there.  I also think the balance works best with four guilds.  It is just something we are seriously floating to see what happens.  We also have to consider leadership takes energy- more than we would care to admit, so having more than four guilds is challenging. 

[Exetrius]

On 6/29/2018 at 6:18 PM, ZCerberus said:

I also don't see a need to be too sketchy here- we are investigating closing Nocturnus as playable and opening the fifth guild in that islandy region for play.

This doesn't mean Nocty won't be important or anything is going to happen to it's history or existence, it is just possibly going to take a vacation to add a little more energy.

 ... In the light of this comment I will be more quick to respond and a put a little less effort in this post than planned:

 

Hereby, I, Exetrius Centario of Zotharith, swear loyalty to Nocturnus!

 

The story of Exetrius and many other characters related to the Centario family and Zotharith, will return!   

 

New sigfigs, new stories, new builds; exciting times! 

[mccoyed]

3 hours ago, ZCerberus said:

If we had similar interest in all five, I would think so- but Nocty was least populous in Books I and II.  It has lots of potential, but alas we have few stalwarts there.  I also think the balance works best with four guilds.  It is just something we are seriously floating to see what happens.  We also have to consider leadership takes energy- more than we would care to admit, so having more than four guilds is challenging. 

This all seems fair but the process for selecting "leaders" on GoH has always been somewhat secretive and it might make sense for you guys to ask the community for volunteers and for people who don't have the time to just step down and take a more consultative role (if that hasn't already happened). Another, less radical, option is for the Guild leaders to more frequently communicate and delegate with especially active/organized members of their guilds so that stuff gets done. Andromeda's Gates benefited from this kind of behavior, at least in Kawashita where the company changed leadership two or three times.

If it makes any difference, I'll be willing to join Nocturnus if it is light on membership. But you're not gonna know how much interest there is in swapping Varlyrio for Nocty or going for a full five guilds unless people considering a change know for sure what the options are. That's all I'm trying to say about making a decision about the roster of Guilds for Book 3 sooner rather than later.

Edited July 5, 2018 by mccoyed

[ZCerberus]

1 hour ago, mccoyed said:

This all seems fair but the process for selecting "leaders" on GoH has always been somewhat secretive and it might make sense for you guys to ask the community for volunteers and for people who don't have the time to just step down and take a more consultative role (if that hasn't already happened). Another, less radical, option is for the Guild leaders to more frequently communicate and delegate with especially active/organized members of their guilds so that stuff gets done. Andromeda's Gates benefited from this kind of behavior, at least in Kawashita where the company changed leadership two or three times.

That's all I'm trying to say about making a decision about the roster of Guilds for Book 3 sooner rather than later.

Agreed on all points and it is in process.

We are looking to implement this structure more or less now.  

[The Stad]

It’s always seemed to me like the driving force in GoH has been the individual players. Since there hasn’t been much of a guild-against-guild dynamic to this date, the membership of guilds has not had a major effect on the way that this game has been played. As far as I can tell, this has been a place where people can come and build their own individual stories in a shared world. While other games like AG or BoBS have come across as unbalanced because they’re built around the weekly generation of points or the acquisition of territories, GoH is moved forward by monthly or quarterly challenges which are won by individuals. Case in point, the current story is founded on the winning individual entry from the last book (I know and love the combined story, but ultimately it is HQ’s story that officially won), and the point spread between the four guilds had nothing to do with determining the winner. 

I think the point I’m trying to make is that, unless book 3 is going to have a drastically different gameplay mechanic, I don’t think the player count for each guild will affect the way in which everyone plays the game, and how the game is driven forward.  To that end, from an administrative standpoint, would it be more straightforward to simply have overarching leadership, rather than guild-based?

[ZCerberus]

1 minute ago, The Stad said:

I think the point I’m trying to make is that, unless book 3 is going to have a drastically different gameplay mechanic, I don’t think the player count for each guild will affect the way in which everyone plays the game, and how the game is driven forward.  To that end, from an administrative standpoint, would it be more straightforward to simply have overarching leadership, rather than guild-based?

Well we kept track of the gold and it was a sense of pride if nothing else in Book I.  It also gave a fun sense of rivalry and funny and light spirited teasing.

Book II used your guild allegiance as choice designation for the wars in each guild.

Book III will likely have some impact as well, though how- Book I style? something else?... we’ll see.

We also need to keep you guys interested- we seemed to have some good response to making Varlyrio playable, but so merging has to give in terms of managing it.  Like an RTS expansion- sometimes one side isn’t included as to make it fresh.  Just a thought we’re having here.

Leadershipwise we are looking to give each Guild a leader and a Lieutenant with your mods as the more behind the scenes leaders.

It’s all subject to change.

 

[x105Black]

I feel that Nocturnus is the most different of the guild choices, followed by Kaliphlin.  Removing one of those in favor of Valyrio serves to water down the variety, in my opinion.

Then again, I have yet to be a participant, and have only lurked around and contemplated joining.  As such, I like that this is more of a shared storytelling area than a game.  I don't have the ability to give an in-depth game as much attention, but being able to build out my story alongside like-minded individuals does appeal to me.

[Grover]

3 hours ago, The Stad said:

It’s always seemed to me like the driving force in GoH has been the individual players. Since there hasn’t been much of a guild-against-guild dynamic to this date, the membership of guilds has not had a major effect on the way that this game has been played. As far as I can tell, this has been a place where people can come and build their own individual stories in a shared world. While other games like AG or BoBS have come across as unbalanced because they’re built around the weekly generation of points or the acquisition of territories, GoH is moved forward by monthly or quarterly challenges which are won by individuals. Case in point, the current story is founded on the winning individual entry from the last book (I know and love the combined story, but ultimately it is HQ’s story that officially won), and the point spread between the four guilds had nothing to do with determining the winner.

I agree with the observation; it appears that this is not a place where there are weekly accumulations of points (which is actually appealing to me; I like the story-driven aspect and probably would be less interested if we had point accumulations), so the guild vs. guild is not as strong as some of the other games on Eurobricks.  I am still in favor of guild leaders, however, and it may be that the guild members can elect a leader, who can help direct the story of the guild.  I really like the open ended history lore challenges (like the one that HQ won), as these are voted on by the members.  Based on these observations, why would it be a problem to have unbalanced guilds?  If Nocturnus had only one member, then that person would be the guild leader and able to direct the story.  If you don't like that, then you could join it and help write it.  Folks seem to still be able to build in any guild they want, but those in the guild have more direct effect on the guild direction.

I am closer to being in x105 Black's camp than the rest of the prolific builders here due to some really tough time constraints since I joined (although I have a few small builds), so I am more than happy to defer to those who are prolific builders here.  In any case, I am enjoying the collaborative story atmosphere here and being a part of the guilds!

[mccoyed]

I am by no means advocating for the adoption of AG style game mechanics. But it remains the case that Book 2 has lasted ~4 years, since I joined GoH and longer. In the last two years, activity has been in dramatic decline (for many reasons). If we want to boost activity and draw people back to GoH and keep them active consistently, we need regular community content. As other RBGs learned from GoH and have demonstrated successfully, community is what drives this whole thing. Community content, for better or worse, translates to administrative organization: the planning and execution of events, contests, challenges, and unlimited frameworks (Age of Mitgardia, UoP, etc). The way this has gotten done here has been "insider" based, which certain builders being invited to contribute to community content, have their ideas explicitly drive contests/challenges, etc. The bedrock, though, is always the stories we individually come up with, share, and build on. The best thing about RBGs is when you can inspire other builders to do a dialogue with you through the "game", by directly referencing ideas, characters, and places from your builds.

To me, we just have to stimulate that as best we can. I think the evidence is clear that we need an active "inside" group to make this work. There are two options, roughly:

1. Reform the inside group of mods, guild leaders, lieutenants, etc so that inactive long-time folks are rotated out in favor of active newer folks. This invites rapid, dynamic change and that can be difficult to keep up with. I had a lot of trouble with AG's rapid shifts compared to GoH as I'm a bit of a flake. There are probably other downsides here, too.

2. Reform the organizational structure of GoH itself. This would probably mean going a little less "behind closed doors" and a little more transparently democratic and community-driven in terms of content. This is probably my preference, but there are also some costs to doing that, most obvious to me would be the loss of amazing surprise updates where unexpected builders get to play a central role. This option means giving up the mystery that often makes GoH so fun!

There's also trying to do a combination, which may be what ZC is trying to say is happening. I'm just laying out my thoughts, by the way, not trying to rock any particular boats.

EDIT:

It's worth noting that Lands of Roawia, the closest thing to GoH out there, is also in decline to the point where members are discussing closing it out. It wasn't that long ago that I had to choose between LoR and GoH because both were so active it was impossible keep up with them at the same time! It seems there's a changing of the guard happening with a "generation" of older AFOLs simultaneously slowing down without a robust enough "younger generation" coming in to make the transition smooth. What can be done about this? How do we keep these communities alive? Questions probably every venerable RBG out there have to ask right now.

Edited July 6, 2018 by mccoyed

[Dr Rod]

Nocturnus will never die, not whilst I live there ;)

Dr Rod

 

[ZCerberus]

11 hours ago, mccoyed said:

I think the evidence is clear that we need an active "inside" group to make this work. 

There's also trying to do a combination, which may be what ZC is trying to say is happening. I'm just laying out my thoughts, by the way, not trying to rock any particular boats.

EDIT:

It's worth noting that Lands of Roawia, the closest thing to GoH out there, is also in decline to the point where members are discussing closing it out. It wasn't that long ago that I had to choose between LoR and GoH because both were so active it was impossible keep up with them at the same time! It seems there's a changing of the guard happening with a "generation" of older AFOLs simultaneously slowing down without a robust enough "younger generation" coming in to make the transition smooth. What can be done about this? How do we keep these communities alive? Questions probably every venerable RBG out there have to ask right now.

Right- it’s what we grapple with.  What we want to avoid is a bully stomping on everything and ruining the community and making everything theirs.  For this reason we’ve tried to keep a master storyline that can be influenced by the community.  The important part is keeping a framework to prevent radical change outside final challenges.  That hasn’t stopped the community from keeping their realms interesting and eventful.

Being a guild leader isn’t all butterflies and rainbows.  There’s work and time involved as well.  We have actually shifted leaders fully from the start once- and now we’re looking to do more enhancements.

Book I looked like this:

Avalonia- DC until challenge 3ish then ZC in the bakground as DC retired to pursue other interests.

Kaliphlin- Si-MOCs

Mitgardia- Sirens-of-Titan- retired for career purposes, replaced by Ecc

Nocturnus- IScreamClone support from Taz

Then ISC retired from Mod

 

Book II

Avalonia- RogueAngel

Kaliphlin- Ska

Mitgardia- Ecc support from kabel

Nocturnus- ZC support from Mass Editor

Mods changed to Ecc and ZC.  Regulator changed to kabel 

 

Book III

Avalonia- Rogue... Lieutenant- HQ

Kaliphlin- Ska... Lieutenant- pending

Mitgardia- Soccerkid6... Lieutenant- Ecc

Varlyrio- ?? Lieutenant- ??

Nocturnus- ?? Lieutenant- ??

Mods Ecc and ZC.  ZC to consult and Lieutenant guild if needed. 

[mccoyed]

All right, that all seems reasonable. Who are you looking at to support Ska and run Varlyrio and/or Nocturnus then?

[narbilu]

If I would get the right support of the community and the leadership of GoH, I am willing to move Nar Bilu to Varlyrio,
start filling the island, the story and become the Grand Master of the island.

As a frequent participant of Book I and Book II and as one of the staff players/writers of AG, I think I am suitable for
the job.

With a cause like that, I will spend more time building again.

[ZCerberus]

19 hours ago, mccoyed said:

All right, that all seems reasonable. Who are you looking at to support Ska and run Varlyrio and/or Nocturnus then?

Not yet known.  Working on it now.

[mccoyed]

14 hours ago, narbilu said:

If I would get the right support of the community and the leadership of GoH, I am willing to move Nar Bilu to Varlyrio,
start filling the island, the story and become the Grand Master of the island.

As a frequent participant of Book I and Book II and as one of the staff players/writers of AG, I think I am suitable for
the job.

With a cause like that, I will spend more time building again.

Narb and I have worked together before. If you guys gave him the go ahead to run Varlyrio, I wouldn't mind backing him up. With the way lower pressure of GoH's lack of time-sensitive game elements, I think a lot of AG leaders who've gone quiet could be pulled back to GoH as their primary RBG due to the limbo AG is in.

[narbilu]

11 hours ago, mccoyed said:

Narb and I have worked together before. If you guys gave him the go ahead to run Varlyrio, I wouldn't mind backing him up. With the way lower pressure of GoH's lack of time-sensitive game elements, I think a lot of AG leaders who've gone quiet could be pulled back to GoH as their primary RBG due to the limbo AG is in.

Thanks for the convidence... if any of you staff guys want to talk just PM me

[ZCerberus]

Thank you for the interest, but I have special concerns with opening a guild that isn't as established as the others and the leadership there would need to be someone with experience as a leader already for me to be comfortable. 

I actually think we're fairly settled on leaders in the background with some exciting changes.

[Grover]

Since I am still relatively new here and have few builds, feel free to ignore me.  However, I am curious how things work here.  I am happy for opacity with the storyline, as it provides surprises, but I would like to know the reason that the process for leader selection is not more transparent.  I would hate to quash enthusiasm, especially from established builders like Narb.  For instance, what special concerns do you have about opening up Valyrio?  Is there a codified theme or style that you are afraid a new leader would not adhere to, or is this more of a “they don’t have the general feeling of Historical because they weren’t a leader previously”?  Also, how does one become a leader here?  Is there a formal process, or is it simply an invitation from those currently in power?  I’m not saying one method is right or wrong, just that the process is not obvious to me, and perhaps it isn’t to others either.  I would like to see Historica continue, drum up enthusiasm for it, and I would be afraid that people who want to help could get frustrated by a lack of clarity or a feeling of being turned away.

[The Maestro]

I know I have not been very active on the guilds over the past month (still have not introduced my character) but I could volunteer for a position in Nocturnus if needed (That is if it was not closed). My current work load means I cannot build alot, but I could still be active on the guilds. Just thought I would let you know if you need someone else.

[ZCerberus]

4 hours ago, Grover said:

Since I am still relatively new here and have few builds, feel free to ignore me.  However, I am curious how things work here.  I am happy for opacity with the storyline, as it provides surprises, but I would like to know the reason that the process for leader selection is not more transparent.  I would hate to quash enthusiasm, especially from established builders like Narb.  For instance, what special concerns do you have about opening up Valyrio?  Is there a codified theme or style that you are afraid a new leader would not adhere to, or is this more of a “they don’t have the general feeling of Historical because they weren’t a leader previously”?  Also, how does one become a leader here?  Is there a formal process, or is it simply an invitation from those currently in power?  I’m not saying one method is right or wrong, just that the process is not obvious to me, and perhaps it isn’t to others either.  I would like to see Historica continue, drum up enthusiasm for it, and I would be afraid that people who want to help could get frustrated by a lack of clarity or a feeling of being turned away.

The main issue is establishing order.  What has happened is we get one participant from time to time who tries to insert themselves as a leader or "force" and attempts to rebuild everything in their own vision.  What I don't want is an inexperienced leader to get "rolled" by such a personality, especially since only EB staff can run contests etc.  This is especially true in Varlyrio since it is fresh, but the builders no longer are.  We also have some fear that Varlyrio's location and the unknown may have a leader who may take it out of medieval times and into an era we aren't ready to enter yet.  This means a little more hands on may be required. 

Leadership has changed through a few different forces.  The first has been Lieutenants that step up when the leader's interest fades.  This has happened several times.  The second is by winning a story challenge- that gets you noticed and often leads to discussions about interest.  See the final challenge of both Book I and Book II, which may give you a hint on who may be available to lead a certain guild now.  The third is being an established leader or organizer- which may or may not include a lot of building.  However, there is also guild specific issue here as Narb is in Avalonia which already appears to have a path to succession and Varlyrio also appears to have people in place with experience in running a guild or other "games" here on EB.

The process isn't meant to be secret- yet we need to ensure people can influence their guild and the larger lore only to the extent it doesn't create a closed environment where one builder has taken the reigns and made it no fun for anyone any longer.  We try to seek out leaders and staff members who understand and promote this idea.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I feel the leaders have used ideas and lore created in the guilds and brought them into the main story line in fun ways.  The Civil War of Book II was a direct result of the story challenge that ended Book I- Book II brought in ideas and characters that were created by people without leadership roles.  The Drow, Varlyrio, the Algus, the free city structure in Kaliphlin, the Desert King- none of that existed when the stories started, yet they made it into the main story thread because of the superb work of the Guild membership.  Look at how Rogue used the entries for the Avalonian Civil war to announce the results or how we tried a completely different game mechanic for Kali's war.  We have a new Queen now- not because the leaders choose that, but because they left threads in the story line and asked them to be pulled.  Not only did someone pull them, he also consulted the "second place" story to create a super entry into the lore.  We think this is what makes Historica fun and perhaps chaos would not happen if we loosen the reigns- who knows- perhaps it would be even better- but we aren't quite to the point where we are willing to let them loose just yet.  We hope the story and environments are fun here and will stay that way. 

What is clear right now is we need to liven up the leadership and there are certain people who have shown what we think we need in each guild, and we're willing to give it all a spin and see what happens.  If it doesn't jive we'll adjust.  Perhaps the adjustment is a more pure democracy for leader election and maybe that will happen at some point- but for now, there are reasons to take the approach we are trying now.

Sit tight- I think everyone will enjoy hearing the exciting developments we've been working hard to make.

[The Stad]

8 minutes ago, ZCerberus said:

 What is clear right now is we need to liven up the leadership and there are certain people who have shown what we think we need in each guild, and we're willing to give it all a spin and see what happens.  If it doesn't jive we'll adjust.  Perhaps the adjustment is a more pure democracy for leader election and maybe that will happen at some point- but for now, there are reasons to take the approach we are trying now.

Sit tight- I think everyone will enjoy hearing the exciting developments we've been working hard to make.

I don’t think anyone is too concerned about the way in which the leadership is selected, but rather making sure there are enough leaders so that all the guilds can function. If there is a lack of bodies to put in those positions, then it seems worthwhile to consider those with experience who have volunteered. However, if we knew that every guild already has a leadership team, I think much of this current conversation would go away.

It seems that the primary concern among players is resolving whether or not  Nocturnus will be kept open and/or if Varlyrio will become open to play. As far as Varlyrian style is concerned, I don’t think it would fall only to the leadership to enforce the standards that have been established over the past several years; there are many vocal builders here that know what “fits” in this fantasy, and who aren’t afraid to coach players who are less familiar. So it really comes down to establishing a more fleshed out vision of the guild (which is admittedly no small task), and naming the players that will tackle the administrative roles.

From the traffic this thread is getting, I think there’s a lot of excitement for the next book, and I think I can speak for many when I say we have a lot of confidence in what you guys are cooking up. The only question that remains is what guilds will be available to the participants.

[ZCerberus]

I think it is clear Varlyrio will be playable.

I also think the guild threads tell the story.  In both Books, Nocturnus only had 2/3 the discussion as the other guilds and Nocturnus even had 2 of the 5 challenges.  This makes us believe if we stick with four guilds, Nocturnus may find itself in a holding pattern.  Again, there is nothing stopping people from building there or continuing to develop the land, but those builders may need to find a new home for purposes of which guild they represent in the challenges since we are assuming guild affiliation will still matter for this book at least.  If this doesn't work, we will shift, but I think that is the likely direction now.

[gedren_y]

One thing that the leadership may want to consider is adopting something that has been a boon to BOBS, the faction group PM. From my experience it has helped drive cooperative storytelling, with players' own stories getting more woven into the larger story arc, and people can get more direct attention from the leadership to help settle themselves into the style of gameplay.

[mccoyed]

 

4 hours ago, ZCerberus said:

I think it is clear Varlyrio will be playable.

I also think the guild threads tell the story.  In both Books, Nocturnus only had 2/3 the discussion as the other guilds and Nocturnus even had 2 of the 5 challenges.  This makes us believe if we stick with four guilds, Nocturnus may find itself in a holding pattern.  Again, there is nothing stopping people from building there or continuing to develop the land, but those builders may need to find a new home for purposes of which guild they represent in the challenges since we are assuming guild affiliation will still matter for this book at least.  If this doesn't work, we will shift, but I think that is the likely direction now.

It wasn't clear until now! But hey, I also wanted to mention that one of the reasons Nocturnus has less discussion might also be something to do with it, as a Guild, attracting more individualistic, independent builders. Nocturnus is such a broad canvas that people can get really particular inside "corners" of it, while others are overwhelmed by the sheer scope of possibility it offers. Maybe something to consider would be to narrow Nocturnus down a little in terms of its identity among the Guilds. Even if it does't come back in Book 3, might be something to think about.

3 hours ago, gedren_y said:

One thing that the leadership may want to consider is adopting something that has been a boon to BOBS, the faction group PM. From my experience it has helped drive cooperative storytelling, with players' own stories getting more woven into the larger story arc, and people can get more direct attention from the leadership to help settle themselves into the style of gameplay.

This was also common practice in Andromeda's Gates. It could be a little overwhelming with multiple participants and sometimes several distinct PM threads to keep track of. We also used PMs for the Algus Saga and it worked pretty well!

Edited July 11, 2018 by mccoyed

[x105Black]

9 hours ago, ZCerberus said:

I think it is clear Varlyrio will be playable.

I also think the guild threads tell the story.  In both Books, Nocturnus only had 2/3 the discussion as the other guilds and Nocturnus even had 2 of the 5 challenges.  This makes us believe if we stick with four guilds, Nocturnus may find itself in a holding pattern.  Again, there is nothing stopping people from building there or continuing to develop the land, but those builders may need to find a new home for purposes of which guild they represent in the challenges since we are assuming guild affiliation will still matter for this book at least.  If this doesn't work, we will shift, but I think that is the likely direction now.

Closing Nocturnus would be a real shame.