Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Revisit of Elimination of Kingdoms
I appreciate Drogo's analogy, think its pretty astute.  HH, not sure what things you have in mind that a significant number of players object to, curious about that.  And while yes, suggestions for design change are not usually solicited, I think they are fairly received and considered.  So some might be disappointed their idea didn't get implemented, but only comments that disparage or impune our reputation get any kind of repercussion.  I don't mean to imply we incorporate most suggestions, again, not really asking for new things to do, generally when surveying the forum we are asking A or B? , but players like to offer C, D and E.  
I agree with HH and Drogo both. I many times have not mentioned things in the forum. It is not hard to figure out what or when items kind of become off limits so to speak so I do not bring them up anymore. I may be in the minority but except for some of the minor changes I would rather play the original game with new map. The changes I supported when they were brought out are still the ones I like the ones I was against I still do not like. The exception likely being SVC the new one is better than the old hands down, still not could be better.

Also though I have been to many gaming conventions in my late teens and twenties and have met many game designers most all were standoffish and jerks, especially that guy from Steve Jackson games. Rick has his moments but overall is the most approachable (well e-approachable) game designer by far. He actually reads the comments and try's to improve things. I normally follow the logic even when he is making the game softer I am not happy about it but do understand. I really do not like the behind the seen changes that we have to figure out at the expense of one of our game.
That's fair, JF. 

As to the nerfing or softer changes that the hardcore don't like, I know players haven't really had much concern for this tedious business aspect, but we's got's to make a livin'.  If you all brought in 3 new players each, that would probably take care of that, but its not happening.  Alamaze is demanding and will not likely have more than a couple hundred players due to the demands on players to get a pretty intimate understanding of the game.  Most would agree, young gamers don't even read rules, they just start clicking on stuff.  That doesn't work in Alamaze.  So I need Alamaze to be easier to approach for new players.  Meanwhile, arguments that the cheapest PBEM game should be even cheaper and we players don't care about other games and how slow, bad, expensive they are, just aren't facing reality.  This isn't an exclusively altruistic undertaking.  I've turned down three calls from headhunters in the last week that would pay about 8x what Alamaze does, because this is what I want to do and couldn't do it if working full time as an employee.  And I would like to know (asking for the 10th time I suppose), what other game, of any sort, not just PBEM, maybe even including your local dungeon master's campaign, takes more input from its players and offers more variability in format, kingdoms, etc?  I presume silence.  So I think we get some credit there.  Again, I have said we will preserve Classic as it is, so players that want to stay in this space, can do so.  That liberates me as well to go forward as I think best, while taking care of what loyal Alamaze players want.

I know there has been some confusion about what changes are in place in each platform.  That is a main reason why we have stopped making changes in both, and almost all Steel and Magic games have migrated to the new platform so we don't have as much uncertainty about when intended changes are actually implemented.

The other angle I am working is trying to design "Alamaze Light" games outside of Alamaze, where there are Alamaze principles but not all the complexity.  Hoping if we launch a couple of those, the players that do get involved there, will try Alamaze after they get the hang of it.  And current Alamaze players that try it may have an easier time getting their friends to try those than what we have seen in Alamaze so far.  Other than Nikodemus starting those Duel 2 Alamaze games, we haven't seen many referrals from existing players.   

All in all, its been a great Alamaze community, and I mention that quite a bit to new players and posts on other forums like Suspense & Decision, which itself has gone on hiatus.
JF's comment is indeed fair. Rick, you do talk about stuff and receive feedback, and I think that's great, even if we may not end up in the same place. I've never begrudged your ability to make the final call, it is after all your game. Smile

After a decision is made, however, I haven't usually felt that it would be productive (and that word "productive" is a value-neutral characterization) to whine or complain about it after the fact. Rather, I view it as a closed issue and suck it up. And I believe that's the way you prefer it, too, no?

But just because I suck it up, that doesn't mean that I've come to like or agree with the change. (Although in a couple of occasions, I might have... just can't recall off the top of my head.) Which is all I believe that I said in the first place.
I guess I always try to go with what I would call "Alamaze Pure".  I don't think exploits were good, and I think we've stamped them out. 

Yes, players see things quite differently in Alamaze.  Diplomacy or Anonymous?  Magic or Steel?  Rex or SVC?  And so, we have offered all of them. 

Going forward, we can preserve what we have here today, and continue offering new Alamaze, and other, worlds. 

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)