(no subject)

[oblivium]

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Good day, dear Restless! As always, we aim to adjust and improve Nightfell whenever possible, which is why we'd like to run a poll by you regarding the future of the game's AC. Now that our first round is over, we realize just how intangible and confusing the requirements may seem to be, and it's a fine line to walk for everyone. To remedy this, we've decided to ask you what you think and what kind of system you'd prefer for the next rounds.

Because Plurk is limited as far as options and characters go, we'll detail the answers here. Feel free to vote on Plurk, reply to this post, or both!

A.

► We keep the same system, but clarify the guidelines:

A brief summary of what your character has been up to that doesn't rely mostly on handwaved actions, links optional

As we keep an eye out whether threads are provided, we should be able to find evidence of 1. an effort to branch out (ie. tagging a few people and/or avoid exclusively tagging inboxes/castmates), 2. involvement that amounts to more than a few days of active play within the month, and 3. tags that aren't mostly comprised of one-liners

Ongoing threads are fine, but tagging them once or twice every month, for instance, hardly displays a desire to be engaged with the setting/other players

We don't expect anyone to be all over the place all the time. Check-in games are easier to squat, and it's one of the reasons why it's important to us to ensure that players do have the time and desire to participate, especially because AC is relatively easy. These guidelines are implemented in an effort to counter potential squatting and to be fair to current players as well as future applicants

Notify us before the last week of a month if extenuating circumstances prevent you from playing

B.

► A mininum of 2 or 3 threads, a brief summary of what your character's been up to, no comment count required. A couple lines are enough, just to give us an idea of potential consequences your character might face.

C.

► 8+ comments across 2-3 threads + a brief summary. A couple lines are enough, just to give us an idea of potential consequences your character might face.

D.

► 16+ comments across 2-4 threads + a brief summary. A couple lines are enough, just to give us an idea of potential consequences your character might face.

E.

► OTHER (please specify!)

We'll consider your input and feedback and do our best to find a decent compromise for everyone based on your insight! We've been having a blast with you guys and we're really just trying to make sure that everyone's on the same wavelengths. Thank you for your time!

Comments

+1

[arrancar]

i agree. potential applicants shouldn't be a concern for current players. it makes it seem like the existing playerbase is replaceable if they don't perform up to standard and adds unnecessary pressure in a game that was meant to be no AC.

i understand the desire to prevent squatting and i wholeheartedly support it, but i think it's far too early to start assuming that players will squat the very first month into the game. it should be a concern that's addressed over time if and when a pattern noticeably emerges for a given player/character. i feel like it's more important to foster a positive relationship with existing players and prioritize their needs above those who aren't even in the game. right now, it seems like there is a lack of trust in players to be active for the long term when we're all still new and acclimating to the game setting. one of the appeals to a no activity check game is not having to worry about comment count and meeting stringent requirements, especially when RL gets busy or unexpected difficulties arises.

i'm totally ok with it if that doesn't align with the vision and expectations for this game. however, A seems too ambiguous to me as a result. it feels like there are requirements to it but without the clarity and validity of a number count, so i'm voting for C.

i'd also like to suggest implementing the poll in a locked post to the community instead of a plurk since i feel like this matter should only concern the players who're currently in game rather than open it to the public as a whole.

[oblivium]

Thank you for bringing up such good points! I 100% understand where you're all coming from and it's definitely not the kind of impression we wanted to give. You guys are nothing short of amazing and we fully acknowledge that we might have jumped the gun a little too fast! Thanks for being patient and willing to work with us while we adjust! We've already revoked all warnings that were issued in October based on the feedback we've just received.

[blackvestal]

Thank you, mods, for being so receptive (and also for the revoked warning, but in general)! I didn't say that in my previous comment and meant to. You're doing a great job!

[oblivium]

Before I pass out, I just wanted to mention that I'd completely forgotten that polls were a thing on DW as well a;slkdfj. Apologies! Since you guys seem to be mostly of the same mind, we'll pay particular attention to the feedback you leave here!

[arrancar]

no worries! re: polls i mainly brought it up because not everyone in game has access to plurk and having it locked to the community would ensure that votes won't be compromised by people who're not in the game. since many of us seem to be on the same page and you'll be attentive to the feedback here, it should be fine!

i really appreciate your willingness to listen to our feedback and engage in open communication with us. thank you for your hard work and no rush! i know managing a game can be a lot, so take the time you need and don't sweat it. 👍