The Idea Police

[battlewraith]

28 minutes ago, arcane said:

I’m… pointing out another example of something that is taking forever to change, essentially trying to empathize with you. Guessing you missed that since you said all this irrelevant shit. 

 

You're missing the point. It's not about the devs or how long it takes them to implement an idea. 

It's the fact that you have armchair developers beating  suggestions like they owe them money and posturing like it really matters, probably turning people off to the forums in the process. That's pretty silly in light of how things are actually working.

[Sharh]

From the moment i saw this thread (at 1 page), i knew it was destined to get locked. Please lock this ever downward spiraling echo chamber so the most current thread here isnt vitriol and despair.

[GM_GooglyMoogly]

Some more Suggestions that made it into the game: 

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/1887-rikti-training-dummies-outside-of-the-warzone/

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/2926-energy-aura-for-tanks/

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/4123-put-the-statesman-task-force-and-lord-recluse-strike-force-back-as-they-were/

 

I was working my way from oldest to most recent, but I'm still in 2019 and I'm tired of looking.  

 

Also, can we please not resort to name-calling?

[dukedukes]

1 hour ago, Ghost said:

Maybe it’s just me, but I would think if an idea was so good that it catches a Devs eye - they would reach out to the person suggesting it if they had any questions.

I just find it hard to believe they would read through the entire thread, hoping to see their question asked/answered somewhere.

 

In my little brain, I believe it all comes down to acceptance.  People come up with suggestions, and just have to have the approval of everyone.  They NEED people to tell them how great the idea is, even though we are all just random people.

Ive seen it time after time on here.  Someone makes a suggestion.  The minute someone doesn’t like it, they are accused of being abusive or attacking the person making the suggestion.

Once they are told no one attacked them, it ends with “I’ll just never make another suggestion about anything ever again!!!”

 

The truth is if you have a suggestion, make it and then move on.  Quit worrying about what other people think.

It is impossible to please everyone all of the time. 

 

We can't influence peoples expectations on a first impression, there's no real opportunity. Having a reactionless and reply free option like GooglyMoogly mentioned is a good alternative for those who understand (or find out) their ideas will be criticized. Some of us enjoy talking through an idea and I believe this exchange adds value. I specifically have made suggestions here only to understand how the community feels about an argument I have as I felt it was too late to implement the suggestion, but if I saw the community understood and agreed with my perspective then maybe there's a chance for a somewhat drastic change.

 

It can be easier to convince a dev of a change as they are likely more system and balance minded, more logical basically. I can argue a case to people like this much easier than others, but the community is ultimately the recipient of the change and have to be okay with it to a degree.

[Forager]

53 minutes ago, JasperStone said:

Guidelines 1, 2, and 3.

You are telling us what to say and what not to say.

 

Oh man... no... I'm not a mod.

 

I'm not telling you what you can and can't say. I'm giving my opinion of the things people do say. I didn't think it was that nuanced, but a LOT of people have missed it, so at least you aren't alone.

[golstat2003]

28 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

 

If you have a situation where 99% of the suggestions will fail and the ones that don't take years to implement--what is the purpose of the forum?

Does the benefit it brings to the development team outweigh the aggravation of people who think they might be heard but instead get thrown into the feasibility shredder?

 

The dev team has already said it brings them benefit. That’s really the only opinion that matters on whether this sub forum is valuable. They have stated it’s valuable in multiple threads and on discord.

[tidge]

7 minutes ago, dukedukes said:

 

We can't influence peoples expectations on a first impression, there's no real opportunity. Having a reactionless and reply free option like GooglyMoogly mentioned is a good alternative for those who understand (or find out) their ideas will be criticized. 

 

If other users cannot react or reply to such posts, why should we be able to read them in the first place?

[dukedukes]

Just now, tidge said:

 

If other users cannot react or reply to such posts, why should we be able to read them in the first place?

I agree, I think you would see people make topics mirroring the topics we can't respond to. My original suggestion for this was a mod only visibility setting for topics (like the hide option). Something is better than nothing though, so I'd be fine with the GM's idea.

[JasperStone]

8 minutes ago, Forager said:

 

Oh man... no... I'm not a mod.

 

I'm not telling you what you can and can't say. I'm giving my opinion of the things people do say. I didn't think it was that nuanced, but a LOT of people have missed it, so at least you aren't alone.

This is you deflecting and again calling us stupid.

 

If many people missed it...

It's not us... it's you.

[Forager]

2 minutes ago, dukedukes said:

I think you would see people make topics mirroring the topics we can't respond to.

 

That's exactly what would happen... or worse people would make new threads in that subforum to reply.

 

A subforum that you can't reply to isn't really a forum. I don't think that idea has anything to do with the problem being discussed.

[Forager]

7 minutes ago, JasperStone said:

If many people missed it...

It's not us... it's you.

 

That's one possibility.

 

Some people got it, though, so it's hard to be sure.

[JasperStone]

1 minute ago, Forager said:

 

That's one possibility.

 

Some people got it, though, so it's hard to be sure.

The many outweigh the few.

[Widower]

53 minutes ago, Super Atom said:

I find it easiest when someone disagrees with you, to call them a plethora of names and call them a rudra alt

 

Just break every rule on this website, it's really fast and easy to do

It's Rudra's forum, and we're all just living in it. (Don't do the other thing, though. I don't want to have to do the paperwork.)

 

14 minutes ago, dukedukes said:

I agree, I think you would see people make topics mirroring the topics we can't respond to. My original suggestion for this was a mod only visibility setting for topics (like the hide option). Something is better than nothing though, so I'd be fine with the GM's idea.

You can hide your own threads after (or even while) creating them, I believe.

[dukedukes]

9 minutes ago, Forager said:

 

That's exactly what would happen... or worse people would make new threads in that subforum to reply.

 

A subforum that you can't reply to isn't really a forum. I don't think that idea has anything to do with the problem being discussed.

 

My visibility suggestion and GooglyMoogly's idea address the potential ideas we could be missing out on, that's all. It's not perfect. I don't know how you could foster more constructive conversation without an increase in moderation and more rules.

 

1 minute ago, Widower said:

You can hide your own threads after (or even while) creating them, I believe.

Yes but it's unclear if using the existing hide option reaches the desired effect. If it does then we should have this in a sticky to increase awareness.

[PeregrineFalcon]

8 minutes ago, Forager said:

That's one possibility.

 

Some people got it, though, so it's hard to be sure.

I don't have an example of one of my suggestions being implemented in game, but I do have an example of a suggestion thread that I made where people didn't disagree with the suggestion I was making, some people even added stuff and improved upon my suggestion.

 

It's time to develop the Shadow Shard Zones!

 

So I'd like to submit that if you're unhappy that suggestions you like are not being wholeheartedly agreed with that you consider the possibility that they're just bad suggestions.

[battlewraith]

50 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

I think this is an excellent idea!

I think so too. 

I think there should be a place where people can make grand, pie-in-the-sky proposals without having to answer to people's objections over practicality or whatever. 

Ideation often starts with just spitballing weird ideas and that's probably the funnest phase. As opposed to somebody wanting a very modest yet thorough proposal for something is both doable and attractive to whoever happens to be paying attention at the moment. 

 

It's sad that it would have to a single post, no reply sort of thing, but if that's the only way so be it.

[Forager]

This thread has been so bizarre.

 

I said that there are bad actors spoiling the discussions here. I said there were a few pieces of guidance that would improve the discussions.

 

The replies have amounted to "You're trying to censor us!" "If you don't like it, too bad!"

and "How about a place with NO discussion?"

 

And then there's been a pile ironic posters defending the right to criticize things they don't like... while criticizing me personally... for criticizing something that I don't like.

 

It's been a fun time.

[arcane]

13 minutes ago, Forager said:

This thread has been so bizarre.

 

I said that there are bad actors spoiling the discussions here. I said there were a few pieces of guidance that would improve the discussions.

 

The replies have amounted to "You're trying to censor us!" "If you don't like it, too bad!"

and "How about a place with NO discussion?"

 

And then there's been a pile ironic posters defending the right to criticize things they don't like... while criticizing me personally... for criticizing something that I don't like.

 

It's been a fun time.

Are you always like this

[battlewraith]

6 minutes ago, arcane said:

Are you always like this

I notice when you make these little digs, you tend to leave punctuation off at the end.

Is it because you're all "woooooooo I'm so caught up in the moment!" or something?

LOL.

[arcane]

The idea that the OP isn’t advocating for disagreement to be suppressed is absurd. He literally stated that his end goal is less opposition to suggestions. He’s somehow been possessed by this idea that, if he doesn’t directly advocate for post deletions and bans, then he won’t have to come off as the kind of person that tries to silence people. He only wants the GM’s to declare that people disagreeing with him are stupid, until - as he states - some of the disagreement conveniently disappears. I don’t think people are buying it.

[JasperStone]

20 minutes ago, arcane said:

Are you always like this

 You mean like Shrödringer cat?

But in this case, the Victim or the Martyr.

And is one or the other, depending on needs?

[Skyhawke]

2 hours ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

I sense declining excellence in this thread.

 

I sense I'm not getting my donuts. 😒

[Forager]

13 minutes ago, arcane said:

He literally stated that his end goal is less opposition to suggestions.

 

Umm... lol.

 

I'll indulge this. Quote me on that.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 07:47 PM by Forager

[GM_GooglyMoogly]

On 7/17/2025 at 12:54 PM, Forager said:

3. Shooting down ideas is just not a thing. The only person who should be shooting down ideas is the person paying for them. Conversations with naysayers are short, unproductive and not very fun. You can like or dislike an idea, but if you can't think of a way to improve upon an idea and don't want to try, you should not be part of the discussion.

 

Edited yesterday at 07:51 PM by GM_GooglyMoogly

[tidge]

I find this current take slightly disingenuous:

 

36 minutes ago, Forager said:

This thread has been so bizarre.

 

I said that there are bad actors spoiling the discussions here. I said there were a few pieces of guidance that would improve the discussions.

 

When the (unedited) original post is:

 

On 7/17/2025 at 4:54 PM, Forager said:

This subforum has earned a reputation for being a shit place to post ideas. It is suffering from an artificial, user imposed sanction on interesting or productive conversation.

 

Can we get a dev or mod opinion on any of these points? It would go a long way to fostering discussion here.

 

1. The dev's time and ability is an uninteresting and unhelpful talking point that comes up in a ridiculous number of threads. The people who cite it rarely have any idea what they're talking about and use it as a catch all way to "vote" no.

 

2. We are not voting. Posters will often reply something akin to "I'm ok with it..." or "it's a no..." like they're voting. The difference between voting no and saying what you don't like about an idea is subtle, but important for discussion.

 

3. Shooting down ideas is just not a thing. The only person who should be shooting down ideas is the person paying for them. Conversations with naysayers are short, unproductive and not very fun. You can like or dislike an idea, but if you can't think of a way to improve upon an idea and don't want to try, you should not be part of the discussion.

 

There's a handful of very confused posters that don't understand these things and they are ruining conversations and discouraging people from posting their ideas. I don't know that they'll necessarily understand any of this, but a tidy mod opinion on it couldn't hurt. If the ideas flow freely, you're more likely to hear a good one.

 

If there are "a few pieces of guidance" in the OP... minimally they are couched in a list of grievances with a request for a "dev or mod" to offer an opinion upon... which in text comes across as "can I get an AMEN!" but in practice,,,, I don't know what was actually expected... for example:

 

Pseudo-dev responses in red:

 

1) I agree! This is unhelpful! or I disagree! This is helpful!  I kinda wonder why you didn't DM a mod or dev directly for this one... I can imagine it was for public performance reasons, but who knows?

 

2) Voting is cool! or Voting doesn't matter. Again... why would a mod or dev care? And if they did, why would they care how members reply, when it's been shown that the sort of responses identified as non-starters are actually allowed.

 

3) Fire away, buckaroos! or Lower your weapons! Again, addressing flaws in suggestions is allowed, so why publicly call out for a dev or mod response along these lines?

 

The first post doesn't come across as any sort guidance, especially since it is clear in the closing bit that the three points are at-best rhetorical questions, two of which are address in the stickied post "concerning this forum". If there was a concern about "bad actors" or "shit posters" (it's not clear to me how you really feel) you simply could have repeated the "assume good will" mantra from the stickied post.

 

If the entire thesis is "The subforum has a reputation for being a shit place"... maybe try to make the case for or against the thesis? For the record: I believe there are plenty of users frustrated because their ideas were met with criticism instead of rounds of praise. Some of my suggestions were probably more like ugh-gestions... but I didn't take the responses as a personal attack.