jeps
Arcadefire
Because NESing isnt big enough (yet) to get a whole forum devoted to us.
Why is this connected to Civ3?
- Thread starter Abaddon
- Start date
- Status
Abaddon
Deity
Ah, but to get big we first need to expand our borders ....everyone here knows that!
Because bigger does not necessarily imply better?
Abaddon
Deity
Shoot enough arrows you will hit the target aventually.
More people has to be a bonus surely?
More people has to be a bonus surely?
Symphony D.
Deity
Turn that around. Why be a forum?
People wander in here because they're interested in stories and roleplaying and notice the subforum and become intrigued. It functions as a sort of club bouncer. It ensures that most people who come in here have some vague sense of creative writing or roleplaying ability. It's like a secret little club with standards (sort of community enforced ones).
Make it a forum (which we probably wouldn't get; we'd likely be lumped under Other Games or Colosseum). This requires announcements and things by TF. Suddenly we're out in the open and publicized. Anybody can walk in off the main avenue of the forum and drop in. Standards pretty much go out the window. We'll get more traffic. Why? Because people like to play at running the world. That's why Civilization is popular, isn't it? Because it lets you do whatever you want. That is precisely what we don't want. We don't want people who do things arbitrarily. We want people who do things for reasons.
Statistically, a person might be smart, but people are stupid. For every good person we get from such publicity, we will get some multiple more of bad ones. It is the case that certain people adapt quickly to the culture, but others take months to become productive players. We effectively are set up to condition people to play, mostly by beating experience into them.
A huge increase in user throughput would decrease our ability to do this by effectively swamping us with new players (relative to what we get now, mind you) and resulting in a bunch of people who don't know what they're doing as the whole system sinks into mediocrity. That's Scenario One.
Scenario Two is that precisely the opposite happens and our newfound seperation leads to us being totally neglected, losing input from the S&T forum, and dying a slow, entropic death.
Scenario Three is that things stay precisely the same despite a major change of conditions in which case there is no reason to change at all (this is somewhat unlikely).
Scenario Four is that some happy medium between Scenarios Three and One is struck in which user levels increase gradually and we attract a more enlightened and mature player base and become more popular than ever. This is also somewhat unlikely, probably more unlikely than Scenario Three, and rather optimistic to boot.
I don't typically define myself as being cautious or conservative, but frankly I think resources and standards of play to help new players would need to be established before any such move in order to ensure that whatever happens we could cope with an influx of new, possibly "wild" players. If Scenario Two happens we're pretty much screwed regardless unless some sort of "guerilla marketing" campaign is launched, but all the other Scenarios suggest we should be careful.
As the Wiki proves, running out to do something immediately is not necessarily the best course of action.
-----
[EDIT]
What the hell do those matter? "Winning" is relative based on the player's objectives. To speak of "winning in an OCC manner" is a hasty generalization because winning is nebulously defined. If you mean "win the award at the end of the game" I challenge you to name people who actively pursue that goal to the exclusion of all else, and present evidence that proves such beyond a reasonable doubt. If you don't mean that, I ask for a clarification on what exactly this statement means.
I am really sick of the remanents of that discussion and its terminology because they're little more than a poorly concealed ad hominem against people who the espousers of it disagree with, and I would prefer to see it laid to rest permanently.
People wander in here because they're interested in stories and roleplaying and notice the subforum and become intrigued. It functions as a sort of club bouncer. It ensures that most people who come in here have some vague sense of creative writing or roleplaying ability. It's like a secret little club with standards (sort of community enforced ones).
Make it a forum (which we probably wouldn't get; we'd likely be lumped under Other Games or Colosseum). This requires announcements and things by TF. Suddenly we're out in the open and publicized. Anybody can walk in off the main avenue of the forum and drop in. Standards pretty much go out the window. We'll get more traffic. Why? Because people like to play at running the world. That's why Civilization is popular, isn't it? Because it lets you do whatever you want. That is precisely what we don't want. We don't want people who do things arbitrarily. We want people who do things for reasons.
Statistically, a person might be smart, but people are stupid. For every good person we get from such publicity, we will get some multiple more of bad ones. It is the case that certain people adapt quickly to the culture, but others take months to become productive players. We effectively are set up to condition people to play, mostly by beating experience into them.
A huge increase in user throughput would decrease our ability to do this by effectively swamping us with new players (relative to what we get now, mind you) and resulting in a bunch of people who don't know what they're doing as the whole system sinks into mediocrity. That's Scenario One.
Scenario Two is that precisely the opposite happens and our newfound seperation leads to us being totally neglected, losing input from the S&T forum, and dying a slow, entropic death.
Scenario Three is that things stay precisely the same despite a major change of conditions in which case there is no reason to change at all (this is somewhat unlikely).
Scenario Four is that some happy medium between Scenarios Three and One is struck in which user levels increase gradually and we attract a more enlightened and mature player base and become more popular than ever. This is also somewhat unlikely, probably more unlikely than Scenario Three, and rather optimistic to boot.
I don't typically define myself as being cautious or conservative, but frankly I think resources and standards of play to help new players would need to be established before any such move in order to ensure that whatever happens we could cope with an influx of new, possibly "wild" players. If Scenario Two happens we're pretty much screwed regardless unless some sort of "guerilla marketing" campaign is launched, but all the other Scenarios suggest we should be careful.
As the Wiki proves, running out to do something immediately is not necessarily the best course of action.
-----
[EDIT]
Immaterial. Win what? This has never been defined to my satisfaction. Win the game? How do you do that? By killing everyone else? By having the most powerful country? By getting a little sticker from the Mod that says "U r teh winnar!!1"?Lord_Iggy said:
What the hell do those matter? "Winning" is relative based on the player's objectives. To speak of "winning in an OCC manner" is a hasty generalization because winning is nebulously defined. If you mean "win the award at the end of the game" I challenge you to name people who actively pursue that goal to the exclusion of all else, and present evidence that proves such beyond a reasonable doubt. If you don't mean that, I ask for a clarification on what exactly this statement means.
I am really sick of the remanents of that discussion and its terminology because they're little more than a poorly concealed ad hominem against people who the espousers of it disagree with, and I would prefer to see it laid to rest permanently.
MjM
Deity
Why? We have more than enough players for the amount of NESes running at a given time.
Oruc
Reactionary
Its connected to civ3 story writing because the first nes was a story.
I dont like the idea of moving to the colosseum, we'd get alot of crap, if we would move anywhere it would be the civ4 section.
I dont like the idea of moving to the colosseum, we'd get alot of crap, if we would move anywhere it would be the civ4 section.
Symphony D.
Deity
Fair enough. Just don't use those words in the future then. 
TheBladeRoden
Deity
Why is it "Civ3 - Never Ending Stories" and not just "Never Ending Stories"?
Symphony D.
Deity
That then become so virulent they threw it into its own subforum. Is it really that hard to actually read what other people have said?
If it was a rhetorical question, that has also been addressed.
TheBladeRoden
Deity
Are you ever truly independent if you still call yourself a British Commonwealth?
Symphony D.
Deity
Strawman and non sequitur. Totally irrelevent to the discussion. We're not talking about sovereign entities or oppressed peoples here. I'm not going to engage you in a Tyrion-style debate about hands attacking the head or whatever it is you two went on for a page about.
Thlayli
Le Pétit Prince
My thoughts:
Logically, at present Never Ending Stories, in their current incarnation, are not linked to Civ3, any more than they are to Civ4, Civ2, or Civ1.
While they are certainly linked to Civ in general, the only reason this sub-forum ended up here was because the first Never Ending Story started in the Civ3 Stories and Tales forum, as opposed to Other Games or some other place.
Thus, the designation of the forum is erroneous. Regardless of whether it's "good" or "bad," the categorization is wrong, and we all know it. Whatever our separate reasons for wanting to keep the forum here, NES'es don't belong here.
I support a movement of the NES forum to Other Games, and here's why:
1. The chance of attracting newbies uninterested in joining the community is actually lowered by moving us down in the forum.
2. The correct categorization will bring Other Games forum frequenters into the community. These are people we "want," more than the influx of Civ4 forumites.
3. NESing will attract more attention from the relevant people (forum regulars interested in Civ who can post coherently) if it has a larger forum in the Other Games area.
The idea that moving the forum will cause us to lose people is ridiculous. If anyone plans to leave NESing because of a forum move, please raise your hand now.
EDIT:
Other points:
-Rarely do we get Civ3 Stories and Tales regulars joining the forum, 1889 being one of the only examples I can recall, and SG's are an entirely different arena. Few of them have ever popped in here as well. So the idea that S+T provides some life-sustaining influence is probably untrue as well.
-Dying a slow, entropic death would probably be the most likely result of remaining in the Civ3 S+T forum, since Civ3's popularity will gradually wane, reducing the number of people that pop in and randomly discover our enclave.
However, the number of regular forum-goers in the Colosseum, OT and Other Games, where our future hypothetical player base would be derived from, is connected to the fate of the forum at large, and should stay fairly constant.
-If a large increase in community did occur, several steps could easily be taken to acclimate the newbies. Examples are a training NES, a revised, simplified NESing Guide, and an FAQ thread, all of which can be handled if a semi-official "NES moderator" were appointed, as has been proposed before.
-We could definitely merit a standard forum in the Other Games area, since the NES sub-forum far outnumbers the entire "All Other Games" forum, in posts, if not threads.
Logically, at present Never Ending Stories, in their current incarnation, are not linked to Civ3, any more than they are to Civ4, Civ2, or Civ1.
While they are certainly linked to Civ in general, the only reason this sub-forum ended up here was because the first Never Ending Story started in the Civ3 Stories and Tales forum, as opposed to Other Games or some other place.
Thus, the designation of the forum is erroneous. Regardless of whether it's "good" or "bad," the categorization is wrong, and we all know it. Whatever our separate reasons for wanting to keep the forum here, NES'es don't belong here.
I support a movement of the NES forum to Other Games, and here's why:
1. The chance of attracting newbies uninterested in joining the community is actually lowered by moving us down in the forum.
2. The correct categorization will bring Other Games forum frequenters into the community. These are people we "want," more than the influx of Civ4 forumites.
3. NESing will attract more attention from the relevant people (forum regulars interested in Civ who can post coherently) if it has a larger forum in the Other Games area.
The idea that moving the forum will cause us to lose people is ridiculous. If anyone plans to leave NESing because of a forum move, please raise your hand now.
EDIT:
Other points:
-Rarely do we get Civ3 Stories and Tales regulars joining the forum, 1889 being one of the only examples I can recall, and SG's are an entirely different arena. Few of them have ever popped in here as well. So the idea that S+T provides some life-sustaining influence is probably untrue as well.
-Dying a slow, entropic death would probably be the most likely result of remaining in the Civ3 S+T forum, since Civ3's popularity will gradually wane, reducing the number of people that pop in and randomly discover our enclave.
However, the number of regular forum-goers in the Colosseum, OT and Other Games, where our future hypothetical player base would be derived from, is connected to the fate of the forum at large, and should stay fairly constant.-If a large increase in community did occur, several steps could easily be taken to acclimate the newbies. Examples are a training NES, a revised, simplified NESing Guide, and an FAQ thread, all of which can be handled if a semi-official "NES moderator" were appointed, as has been proposed before.
-We could definitely merit a standard forum in the Other Games area, since the NES sub-forum far outnumbers the entire "All Other Games" forum, in posts, if not threads.
Symphony D.
Deity
"If it works, don't fix it."
All of this discussion's well and good. Except there's no need to act on it at present at all.
All of this discussion's well and good. Except there's no need to act on it at present at all.
Please explain how someone who plays Railroads, GalCivII, RoN, or Chess is innately superior to a Civilization IV player in terms of caliber of ability or community adaptability.Thlayli said:
Lose draw, not lose existing base. Don't try equivocation.Thlayli said:
It's the reason I'm here. It's the reason Daftpanzer is here. I know several other people dropped in that way as well. 1889 is by no means the only one whatsoever.Thlayli said:
On a long enough time-scale. Yet we're still getting new people, and the length of that time-scale is undefined.Thlayli said:
Having considered OT for quite some time, I will say it frankly: it's not somewhere I would want a lot of players to come from. It's the general cesspit of CFC in terms of intellectual acumen.Thlayli said:
Bailing out a boat once it's already sinking instead of taking measures to prevent it from sinking in the first place strikes me as foolhardy to say the least.Thlayli said:
I think the real reason that nobody wants to move is all Symphony, his verbose arguments, and his awesome tendency to be prolix.
Still, I find myself listening to him, if only because he sounds so sure of what he's talking about! Plus, he likes to make many references to logical fallacies!
Not berating you or anything, just sayin'.
Personally, hmm...I think we should just stay, ya know? Why bother moving?
Still, I find myself listening to him, if only because he sounds so sure of what he's talking about! Plus, he likes to make many references to logical fallacies!
Not berating you or anything, just sayin'.
Personally, hmm...I think we should just stay, ya know? Why bother moving?
Symphony D.
Deity
I'm actually in favor of moving (at some point). I just think all this sudden rush and discussion over it is ill-advised given the community as a whole is in a rather weak state right now, and that doing so would be bad if not fatal. That makes it rather useless, especially when most of the points given to support it are... just wrong.
TheBladeRoden
Deity
Ah ha! You are already starting to argue like Tyrion and I do!
Symphony D.
Deity
No, because my analogy actually makes sense.
MjM
Deity
- Status
Similar threads
