What Happened to GM Led Weekly Discussions?

[Major_Decoy]

This was an interesting thread, but honestly, I was hoping to have Lusca open a thread about improvements to Independence port.

 

Lusca's proposed changes: It is now a level 1 zone with the trainer in the middle of the bay. The hospital is also in the middle of the bay. You zone in to the middle of the bay. The zoning in shuts off all toggles.

[BurtHutt]

17 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

We actually created a system in-place to accommodate that idea, but then ran into issues (like half the things we try). Primarily, once converted from an AE arc format to a contact arc format, there would be no easy way to make edits to the arc, meaning if there were bugs or typos found later, it'd be very difficult to fix them.

The other concern was logistics. The raw manpower needed to vet arcs and pick ones worth keeping would take a lot of time, since it involves actively and extensively playing/checking arcs, it's the hurdle that has caused Dev's Choice AE arcs to be an on-and-off affair (even though GMs do those). We're all busy adults and the amount of required extra hours to run the massive number of AE arcs that get submitted for consideration is not a small ask.

On-top of it all, if the AE arcs were being considered as official content additions we'd have to scrutinize them twice as hard, since players can hide things in AE arcs very easily. Worse, it would likely involve them surrendering the rights and source files for their story arcs, and that's not something we're particularly comfortable demanding from folks, but would be needed since we wouldn't want somebody to suddenly demand we remove their content after it was made a permanent contact story arc.

At least with Dev's Choice all we have to do is find their arc in the AE system and add a tag, and the player can remove the content themselves if they don't want it on Homecoming anymore, much less involved.

Wow that's so cool this was considered.

 

I know it would take extra people etc. My idea, as far as reviewing and checking for errors, typos etc, was to take on a few volunteers to actually do this. Community staff and not coders etc. This community team would run a competition and players would enter their arcs. The first 10 submitted would be checked and played by the Community staff (maybe put them on the forums then lock them after 20 entries etc). If the Community team would consider the first 5(?), 10(?) and play/review them. If there were minor issues then they would ask the submitter to fix the issues. If there were huge issues then it would be turned down and the submitter would be told here are the issues, please fix and submit next month.

 

Of course there would be a set of rules for submitting and players would need to acknowledge this (giving up rights to creations etc). If there are any real violations or shenanigans then that player could be removed from consideration in the future as well. Also, the submitting player would have to write up any additional background and the HC Wiki entry if it involved original characters and so on.  I don't think this is a tough ask as it is voluntary.

 

It might be best to start with a few of these contacts and see how it goes. If there isn't much interest then no need to expand or continue with it. I'd suggest a contact in Kalisti Wharf as it is an underutilized zone and maybe another in Rikti War Zone. This was all sides have access and it isn't a ton of work. If this proves to go well then add other contacts in the level range where there is less content etc.

 

The objective here is to add content as we know the HC Devs cannot keep up with demand. Also, I think a player had written that Family arc as well? So I am sure there is an appetite for players to submit their missions.

[Luminara]

26 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I find it concerning that players get constantly attacked by other players on this forum anytime they post anything about the HC staff that isn't complete, undying praise.

 

I understand that some of you completely worship the HC staff. That much is obvious by the way you attack any player who so much as asks a question about anything. But do you really have to keep attacking other players? And why do the mods continue to allow it?

 

Well, I guess we'll never know.

 

[Troo]

Thanks @Cobalt Arachne & @Number Six. This almost had a 'behind the curtain panel' feel which many appreciate and would like to see more of.

 

 

@all - Feel free to start up another topic on forum pvp, farming or what-not. That way details related to those discussions can be properly dissected and debated without derailing this surprisingly productive topic. (that's not a challenge) No problem with expanding this topic to be general 'communication' and how the sharing of ideas between players and with the HC team is best accomplished.

 

 

 

[GM Crumpet]

Wow this thread got complicated.

 

To answer the original question, GM's come and GM's go. One GM has this interest and flair, another has a different one. I don't like forums and avoid them if I can. I do tickets and ingame player help, plus reply on discord. Others are base creation wizards and know almost everything that can be done and can go wrong and how to fix it when it does. Others love PvP and do a lot with that area, others do RP and attend events as signature characters for fun. If something stops it's because the GM involved in organising it has left. They leave for various reasons, job opportunities, family commitments, burn out etc. We are all volunteers and real life has to take priority. Sometimes someone else doesn't feel able to take on the vacated role so it falls by the wayside.

 

I saw a few comments about GM's being rude and dismissive. That's almost certainly a mistake based on how it sounded in the head to how it comes across to the reader. I'm a terrible offender for trying to deescalate a situation with humour and sometimes another GM will point out that it could be read as rude. British humour (and European humour) sometimes reads differently across the Atlantic. I apologise for any offence I may cause, it's not intentional but the funny quip to try to calm things down isn't always as amusing in reality as it sounded in my head 🙂 

[Cobalt Arachne]

  

14 hours ago, Nurvus said:

Yes you can join the "gold standard" discord or whatever, but I don't think this is a proper solution. It's a really weird situation from an outside point of view.

We use Discord for development because it is the superior choice for quick & efficient discussions and throwing ideas around, it has nothing to do with trying to exclude anybody. Forums are slow, and responses often out of context because of the way they work, it makes our job harder. We also can't ping our testers for focus testing on the forums, as that's just not a feature the forums have.

 

If the low bar of downloading a free app and joining a server that is open to everyone is too high a hurdle to participate in development discussions at the stage where direction can be influenced, than it feels more to me like the issue is that being involved isn't something that matters enough to the player to make that effort.

The minor effort check is just to ensure people who join are actually are interested in helping discuss and test, and not because they want to tell their friends we're working on <experimental unconfirmed feature> that we never promised anyone anywhere, and then have to deal with people getting upset later when it never comes.

I'm sorry if that reads bluntly, but I just finished explaining earlier in this thread how anybody who wants to have a seat at the table where things get discussed & decided can very easily have one with minimal effort. We've already seen a handful of forum regulars join the test server since I posted just last night, it's not an exclusive club in any capacity, it's a meet-in-the-middle collaboration.

If you want to be involved and influence what we're doing, get involved.

 

---

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Thanks @Cobalt Arachne & @Number Six. This almost had a 'behind the curtain panel' feel which many appreciate and would like to see more of.

Most welcome!

We're not bad guys, I promise.

We're not trying to ruin your game, we aren't trying to force people into playing anything they don't want. We just want everyone to have a fair and fun experience in the game.
There's a common misconception that nerfs are because we don't want players who like X or Y being too strong, but that's wrong, it's entirely because we don't want players who dislike X or Y to feel pressured into something they don't like because of major balance gaps.

Balance is about ensuring all choices are relatively worthwhile choices so you can pick what you like without regrets.

I'm a member of over 20+ different CoH Discord servers (some anonymously others less anonymously) that play on Homecoming. I have City of Heroes friends who have disabilities, are roleplayers, farmers, PvPers, base builders, LGBTQ+, raid runners, AE arc makers... There's no one 'player type' that we favor, because we're trying to ensure everyone who loves this game can play it and find enjoyment in doing the activities they prefer.

Friends sometimes bring broken things to my attention, or mention suggestions that have resulted in very quick additions (Rogue Arachnos chest details on VEATs or the Hero Corps chest detail) but no matter how good a friend, they're never any kind of factor on deciding if I'm going to take on a major project that's going to be hundreds of hours of work; That would be an incredibly nonsensical way to prioritize feature development in a game that has thousands of players.

Most of the dev team rarely finds time to play regularly because we normally put that free time towards working on new things/improvements. We approach development work objectively (and it is work, not fun, scripting missions or FX is not 'fun') and our decisions are motivated entirely by what we think is best for everyone who plays our game.

We do this for free, as a service to the community. Our reward is the satisfaction/fulfillment that comes from doing high-quality work and seeing players enjoy things we add.

[Neiska]

2 hours ago, Krimson said:

This has been suggested before and I am against it because I like to AFK in missions to, yannow, AFK, and I know other players do as well.

 

What I'm wondering though is if there was a related solution. So have a timer of say 60 seconds, and instead of booting the player, simply turn off XP.  

 

Honestly I was thinking more like 10-15 or so minutes, not seconds or even a few minutes. Purely my own personal opinion here but if someone is afk 10-15 mins then perhaps they could log out. I am not saying a booter every 2-3 mins.

[laudwic]

38 minutes ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

  

We use Discord for development because it is the superior choice for quick & efficient discussions and throwing ideas around, it has nothing to do with trying to exclude anybody. Forums are slow, and responses often out of context because of the way they work, it makes our job harder. We also can't ping our testers for focus testing on the forums, as that's just not a feature the forums have.

 

If the low bar of downloading a free app and joining a server that is open to everyone is too high a hurdle to participate in development discussions at the stage where direction can be influenced, than it feels more to me like the issue is that being involved isn't something that matters enough to the player to make that effort.

The minor effort check is just to ensure people who join are actually are interested in helping discuss and test, and not because they want to tell their friends we're working on <experimental unconfirmed feature> that we never promised anyone anywhere, and then have to deal with people getting upset later when it never comes.

I'm sorry if that reads bluntly, but I just finished explaining earlier in this thread how anybody who wants to have a seat at the table where things get discussed & decided can very easily have one with minimal effort. We've already seen a handful of forum regulars join the test server since I posted just last night, it's not an exclusive club in any capacity, it's a meet-in-the-middle collaboration.

If you want to be involved and influence what we're doing, get involved.

 

 

 

I understand using Discord for development, but you also request feedback in the beta forums.  In some areas, there are robust replies from the CoH Developers, other areas, no response or feedback at all.  I spent a good amount of time on the Beta Server testing the DOM version of Illusion at different levels, different secondary power sets, and running comparable content between a Ill/Eng DOM and a Ill/TA Controller to better compare the two sets.   There was exceedingly minimal response from the Devs on that thread.  The only thing keeping me from saying there was zero interaction from the Devs was a single post on an ancillary topic.  There were no replies or attempts to respond to any of the posts related to the actual set itself.  So, there was no meaningful interaction from the Devs for the purpose of that forum topic.

 

Beta Dom Illusion went to live without a change.  Currently, the top post in the Dominator forum is about issues in Phantom Army that were raised and ignored in the Beta forums.  

 

I'm sorry if this reads bluntly, I got involved, I did was was requested, it was ignored.   If you ask for feedback and people take the time and effort to provide what you ask, a curtesy blanket reply that covers a topic in multiple postings would be appropriate.  

 

 

[Number Six]

1 hour ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

We're not bad guys, I promise.

 

1 hour ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

Red side, best side!

 

🤔

[Neiska]

43 minutes ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

  I'm sorry if that reads bluntly, but I just finished explaining earlier in this thread how anybody who wants to have a seat at the table where things get discussed & decided can very easily have one with minimal effort. We've already seen a handful of forum regulars join the test server since I posted just last night, it's not an exclusive club in any capacity, it's a meet-in-the-middle collaboration.

If you want to be involved and influence what we're doing, get involved.

 

 

Hello again Cobalt,

 

I would like to point something out though. It is fine, even very admirable to say "the door is open and we have seats at the table." The thing is though, that ship has already sailed for some. Simply because many who post a differing opinion here in the normal forums is dogpiled, downvoted, or insulted. (but to be fair, both sides in any issue is guilty of all of those things.) As an example I fully expect the usual suspects to downvote this post without even reading my full thoughts or reply here. And after my one and only attempt at taking part in the Beta for my favorite powerset in the game, I most certainly won't be offering my thoughts on a change again, much less share the "ideas table" with the same people.

 

But my point is, is you are more or less asking people to get into a pool filled with sharks. I mean, just how welcoming do you think that would be to those like myself who often have a differing opinion than what is touted as popular? I can't imagine that environment is any better than here in the normal forums, I would expect it to be worse. Speaking purely for myself, I fully expect if I were to take part in the "ideas" discord, there would be eyerolling from some, and downvotes from others. I imagine some would trip over one another to refute or disprove any suggestion or idea I might have, regardless on what that topic is, or what my opinion might be on it. I mean, I have had posts downvoted when I did nothing but thank another player.  Perhaps you haven't seen it, but "that" is the level it's gotten to. If what I had to say or thought on any given issue wasn't respected here then why would it be any different there? I even offered an olive branch, and as of yet still seem uncertain if they are willing to live and let live.

 

Our input might be seen and measured by you the staff, and I thank you for that. For the consideration, even if the reply is a simple "no" or "we want to go a different way." Just knowing that a different opinion was seen and considered is enough for most. It's just the silence we see that can be so frustrating at times.

 

I do admire the staff and all you do, and all the time spent. Even if its features I don't personally like or activities I don't enjoy. Because a dead server is far far worse. A game where there is no advancement, development, grows stagnant and people go elsewhere. And I don't think any of you are bad people. Or even think that those I often disagree with here are bad people. Only passionate about what they care about, and sometimes rude. But I can live with that. But I most certainly won't be collaborating with them if they neither respect me as a person nor my opinion on upcoming changes.

 

Best wishes

[Cobalt Arachne]

44 minutes ago, laudwic said:

In some areas, there are robust replies from the CoH Developers, other areas, no response or feedback at all.

This more than anything else would be attributed to the fact that each of us on the development team have our own set of tempos that we operate by, our own methods and practices.

Some of the team like to be on the forums and responding more directly, others like to sit back and read the feedback without ever letting the players know its been read.

As I've said, I think we can do better on communication, but by the same token very different devs handle different parts of the game. Even I'm reading something in a powers feedback thread, there's almost zero chance I weigh in because I had absolutely nothing to do with those changes.

[Sovera]

1 hour ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

  If the low bar of downloading a free app and joining a server that is open to everyone is too high a hurdle to participate in development discussions at the stage where direction can be influenced, than it feels more to me like the issue is that being involved isn't something that matters enough to the player to make that effort.

 

Doesn't even need to download an app. My Discord is a tab on Firefox and I get the toast window and the warning when beeped same as regular app Discord.

 

 

Quote

Friends sometimes bring broken things to my attention, or mention suggestions that have resulted in very quick additions (Rogue Arachnos chest details on VEATs or the Hero Corps chest detail) but no matter how good a friend, they're never any kind of factor on deciding if I'm going to take on a major project that's going to be hundreds of hours of work; That would be an incredibly nonsensical way to prioritize feature development in a game that has thousands of players.

 

Where are my elemental axes, Cobalt?!

[Bill Z Bubba]

23 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

1# - Ensure your feedback is actually challenging the specific reason behind a change

 

Impossible if the reason behind a change isn't shared.

[Major_Decoy]

Adamastor would like to see his summoning upgraded: There's the normal summoning, or you can do a Relentless four star summoning where he is a Sentinel of Mot.

[Cobalt Arachne]

3 minutes ago, Number Six said:

 

 

🤔

[starro]

Good thread. 

[Number Six]

1 minute ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

 

Thanks, Satan.

[Cobalt Arachne]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Impossible if the reason behind a change isn't shared.

  

23 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

1# - Ensure your feedback is actually challenging the specific reason behind a change

 

If somebody can't see the change's reason (speaking for my own projects at least), and they ask respectfully, I am pretty forthright behind a change's intended purpose.

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

Yes, I have seen that the developers are pretty good at responding to reasonable questions.

 

In one of the recent Feedback threads I specifically asked, "Other than that, can I ask what the point of changing the power availability for the non-Epic & non-Arachnos ATs?" And both Captain Powerhouse and Faultline responded explaining their reasoning behind the changes.

 

And I've seen them explain the reason behind other changes as well. But I really do think, and I'm sorry to keep harping on this, that having the reasoning explained in the OP of these threads will go a long way towards derailing unfounded criticism and speculation, as well as reduce the need to even ask those questions.

 

And yes, there's always going to be people that will say "I understand the reason and I disagree anyway" and/or "I know what the devs said, but here's what I think the real reason is." So there's no reason for the DDL to respond to my post with a "Well, ackthually..." Yeah, I know. But refusing to give explanations simply because some people might ignore them just doesn't make any sense.

[Seed22]

27 minutes ago, Number Six said:

 

 

🤔

Hey now, no one ever said Red is bad. If you ask me, it’s BLUE that’re the evil ones :P

[laudwic]

42 minutes ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

This more than anything else would be attributed to the fact that each of us on the development team have our own set of tempos that we operate by, our own methods and practices.

Some of the team like to be on the forums and responding more directly, others like to sit back and read the feedback without ever letting the players know its been read.

As I've said, I think we can do better on communication, but by the same token very different devs handle different parts of the game. Even I'm reading something in a powers feedback thread, there's almost zero chance I weigh in because I had absolutely nothing to do with those changes.

 

With that explanation, respectfully, you need to better decide if you are going to put things on Beta or not.  Requesting feedback and then not responding is discouraging.  Reading a post that chides about involvement after experiencing a complete lack of feedback leaves a very poor taste.  

 

As it currently exists, there is an expectation that there would be some reasonable amount of back and forth.   If there is a request for feedback, the proponent of the change should expect to make the occasional, even blanket, reply.   

 

If there is no intention to respond to feedback, state that in the onset.  For example: "This powerset represents the proliferation of the Illusion Control set from Controller to Dominator.  In doing so, we have replaced and reimagined some of the powers.  After internal testing, we are confident that the set is ready for the Live server and are solely seeking feedback for bugs or other difficulties related to the powers.  We are not seeking feedback for the functionality or design decisions in revising this set to make it appropriate for use with the Dominator class at this time.  Please limit your responses accordingly."

 

[Black Zot]

2 hours ago, Cobalt Arachne said:

 

 

If the low bar of downloading a free app and joining a server that is open to everyone is too high a hurdle to participate in development discussions at the stage where direction can be influenced, than it feels more to me like the issue is that being involved isn't something that matters enough to the player to make that effort.

 

Or the player has been burned in the past by Discord and its complete lack of respect for privacy and the right to control one's own computer, and no longer trusts this spyware program masquerading as a chat server.

[Cobalt Arachne]

34 minutes ago, laudwic said:

With that explanation, respectfully, you need to better decide if you are going to put things on Beta or not.  Requesting feedback and then not responding is discouraging.  Reading a post that chides about involvement after experiencing a complete lack of feedback leaves a very poor taste.  

Won't disagree, honestly 'Focused Feedback' once on Brainstorm could probably be called something more fitting to ensure it conveys the right ideas.

Everything is different depending on the context of the changes, for some features even though it's called 'Focused Feedback' it's really more just hoping people find bugs, since some features are not really possible to deeply change direction by the time they're on Brainstorm.

Perhaps that naming convention has contributed to the schism of communication; I can bring up discussions on finding a better name for those.

 

---

If I'm being honest, I think a lot of our dev practices we just inherited from how the retail devs handled things, but as a non-profit operation we don't have the same considerations and I think we could improve our work by challenging or redoing some of the conventions we've relied on that have honestly not served to help us at all, and have only made things more difficult as a result.

Example: The practice of not being forthright with design purposes is standard in the game's industry because very frequently the answer would be "We did this to make more money and increase our game subscription numbers" which is a business motive that obviously players are going to scorn, so rather than be honest about it, you keep silent. Which as paid game studo employees working for a publisher is the only move they really can make, but as unpaid volunteers who's only motives are making the best game we can, this doesn't serve us as much good.

Since we don't have any kind of profit motivations of that kind, I think us being better with our communication will only help make our job easier.

[Cobalt Arachne]

7 minutes ago, Black Zot said:

Or the player has been burned in the past by Discord and its complete lack of respect for privacy and the right to control one's own computer, and no longer trusts this spyware program masquerading as a chat server.

That's valid. Honestly that same argument could probably be made against any number of communication applications.

Personally, I've used Discord for many years, since its earliest days and have never had any issues with it, but I will always respect an individual's decision on what they do or don't do with their own computers. There are always non-install options like browser Discord as well.

However, Discord is what we use on the development team here at Homecoming. It's what we prefer for our work, that's just the reality of it, if you opt out for your own security preferences, I understand and respect that, at least you're not opting out because we weren't open about inviting everyone to participate.

[Troo]

you've earned one today.