ATS: News from the Advanced Test Server

[jamela]

The only use I can imagine for a points system in Ring is for Nevrax to guage which Ringers are worth their while allocating significant resources to support the type of flexibility that may put strain on the systems. I don't think this should have anything to do with our toons, it should be solely dependent upon a Ringer's success as a creator. How do you assess that, really? I've a suggestion, or the beginnings of one:

I envisage Ringers being allowed to create and toy with a number of maps/instances/scenarios - say 5, just as we have 5 toon slots. Only one of which may be active and hosted at any one time. So you log your active scenario in and out from your Ryzom chat line, perhaps? I'd suggest that each of us is also allowed to be a patron to one scenario of one other player, making that scenario active when we are logged in. Of course we'd have no control of it, rights still belong to the creator. When many of us around the world pick one scenario for our patronage, though, that scenario may effectively become permanent through our support alone. The point, though, is that it gives us, the players, an opportunity to choose something that we want to see in our world, and Nevrax an easy way to see who makes the most successful and popular scenarios and may be worthwhile investing time and resources in allowing them to make outrageous maps that risk bringing the system down

Edit: Hehe, Xycox sort of beat me to it while I was typing.

[richky]

I'd like to add my support to a sponsorship system such as those suggested by Xycox and Jamela, and not a point system based on character levels (unless those points could be used to sponsor others as in Xycox's idea). I also do not like the idea of grinding Ring levels, i.e. the more maps you make the more stuff you unlock. I would rather see people spend more time making one great scenario than churning out mediocre stuff for points.

[kaetemi]

my suggestion:
players give positive/negative comments on scenarios.
then at the end of each month:
- count all the positive comments of this month
- x = maximum positive comments the user ever had in a month
- (if this month's positive comment count > x, then x = this count)
- max. total items in scenario = default + x / 20

[oldmess]

My suggestion: if I pay for the hosting, let me have the full use of the tool.

I'm sorry, but all this discussion of having to grind or whatever when what we're essentially doing is providing content seems silly to me. I'm not of the school that says the ring is bad because we're doing Nevrax's job for them (I've seen that opinion around here); I love the potential of something like this. But in a sense, we are doing their job for them; in addition to paying for that privilege, now we have to earn access to different parts of it? Please, no.

I'm sympathetic that there's the potential for creating too many scenarios or something that crashes the server. But, how is that our problem? That's their engineer's problem and we shouldn't have to solve it by proving our worth or creativity. Besides, how does one prove one is worthy to get full access to what he/she is paying for:

* Grinding for ring points: People create mediocre crap to generate the required xp and then throw it away.
* Based on toon level: What does my ability to repeatedly hit the nuke button have to do with my ability to create good scenarios?
* Based on other player's votes: Great; a popularity contest. Some get access to more content just because they have more friends? Some of the most creative people might very well be the types of players that don't have a large circle of friends.

Worst case: Come up with a dual price model. One price for those that want to play with it and and a higher price for those that want fewer restrictions. Think of it like the software packages that come in "lite" and "full" versions. If the higher price seems to high for some individuals, allow for joint ownership of the higher price accounts so interested people can band together if needed.

[marct]

I have yet to read everything since Xavier's post, but here is my general thinking at the moment:

This should be treated as FPS map makers. Everyone should have full use of the toolkit. Sure crappy maps get created, but people do not play the crappy ones after it is clear they are crappy. Are you looking for a way to cleanup the crappy maps? Make them expire if they are not used.

It seems more important the quality of map/scenario/Moderated Event you create than anything. So my question is, how do you rate these things to determine who are the best Ring creators? What are the best Ring scenarios? And how do you reward those creators?

I don't see the Ring (creation wise) as a way to keep players, some people like to do this kind of stuff, and some people do not. The content, and good content will make players stay in Ryzom.

So shouldn't it be more like you create good content Nevrax gives you tangible stuff? I mean what will float the boat of the Ring Creator to a point that they want create more stuff? Free hosting of your Ring scenario? Having tutoring assistance from a Dev or Event Manager? Having Event Managers use their scenario? Gaining notariety for making good maps? Having Nevrax give you a free month on your Ryzom account? Look back a bit here, and see what drives the FPS map creators? I think it is really just notariety.

Back when I initially saw them say there would be a way to rate scenarios, I thought, great that will help make sure everyhting that is good is seen by the masses.

Hmmm, think I have rambled now.

Edit, toon levels is a bunch of crap, if you didn't cap skills it might be better, but you are hindering the folks that built a living environment by socializing, supporting others, etc. They get penalized for helping out before and not being on the constant grind. What a joke.

[marct]

One reason I would limit people is the time and resources (=money) I would have to spend to keep them running. For something like player created content there would have to be a support staff, server space, bandwith, manuals, additions, bugixes, adimistration etc. So giving everybody the space for 100 maps and all the tools could be a big dent in the operating budget. It is sensible to have some sort of limit on it.

The increase in budget from operating has to come from somewhere. Why not charge for the best tools/options ?

Now limit me to 5 scenarios until it is proven I can create decent ones, I am fine with that. Once I make one that people like, let me have 10, etc.

[marct]

I can just about see the logic of ppl creating content that they experienced ingame, ie by their level and thus having a good idea of how things work. <snip>

Really? Only if you want scenarions where you stand in 1 place and kill 5 million of the same creature.

[marct]

I also wonder which character would be used to determine level. The character in my first slot is not my main. In my first character slot is a level 10ish. Second slot is Jelathnia, my actual main. So would level be determined by automatically finding the highest-level character, or just the first slot character?

And what about all of the toons that have long since expired linked to my account. Those other 400 levels I have are not even in any of the slots I own today.

[iphdrunk]

I can just about see the logic of ppl creating content that they experienced ingame, ie by their level and thus having a good idea of how things work. <snip>

Really? Only if you want scenarions where you stand in 1 place and kill 5 million of the same creature.

That said, Rushin's point is a valid one... it takes away the surprise factor. If a player hasn't seen vorkoo yet, being able to place it at will in a scenario when he's been only playing for two weeks....

[apb47]

I agree with what kostika (and others) said earlier - *if* we have to somehow level our creation tools skill, let it be linked to the ring alone. However, the idea of going on how people rate the scenario carries with it a couple of problems:
1) as oldmess said - some people may be great at creating, but only have a few friends, so low total number of votes (though it could be based on a weekly percentage scale, I suppose)
2) which scenario will you give "10/10, whazaaam - it Rocked, I luv yooooooouuuuu" marking to; the small map with a story about the lonely yubo, or the large map involving a wide variety of plant life, animal life, npcs, buildings etc etc. The strong get stronger, whilst the newcomers might work their way up to a gingo eventually.
Perhaps everyone could be given a very comprehensive starting package, but without bosses, and only from one land (which they choose) and then earn others lands/mobs later? Perhaps points for how long you have scenarios existing, with X points a day if at least Y number of people play it?

a few non-points topic questions: it was mentioned earlier (I think) that we can't take anything out of the scenarios (to stop cheating). Does that mean your character stats/inventory is frozen until you leave? or will we take mats in, craft, then lose the crafted item when walking out again? and what about levels? I suppose I could easily create a land where I can stand on an island, and nuke the 5* jugs around me without fear of dying etc etc. One and not the other? - you'll get people grinding levels, then coming back out and seeing their equipment back to full strength.