DeletedUser
Guest
Influence means a direct line and conversation. If you looked at the linked thread, you would discover that SmashNasty refers to where the CMs asked the moderators directly for input on the w3 settings. I don't recall players at large being asked for input, do you? That would imply that they hold more weight.Quick clarification: Even if moderators had a direct line to CMs (which we do, through skype and obviously we can PM them, which is direct), that doesn't mean that they can influence game settings and world ends. Forum moderators moderate the forums; they don't run the server. Yes, we can suggest things, but that holds as much weight as the suggestion of any other player.
I'm not sure if you realize this, but it is the job of the CM to represent the world to the product managers and make sure that the players are happy with the decisions, and they are appropriately communicated. This hasn't happened.To add to that, not even CMs choose exactly when a world ends. In the same way that CMs don't choose when a world starts and sometimes don't even get to choose settings, the actual people who handle all of that are the Product Managers. From what I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong if you know I'm wrong/have proof, CMs can suggest that things happen, not necessarily just do them, and even then Product Managers must approve them.
False. You didn't even look at the thread she linked, did you? Here's what she said (bold added):1) There can be as many threads as possible, but she said she was "in comparison recently re-reading it". That doesn't say when she read it, how recently was the time before, etc.
No where does that say she had read it. No where does that say she was re-reading it. In fact, it explicitly states that she had not read it.I haven't read all the history. I have had no need to until now.
For 4 months (5?) what have the CMs been doing while we asked about the .net standards?In a month, with the opening of a new world, transferring of power and ensuring that she is properly trained, it's a bit much to expect that she can also get the Product Manager to subsequently agree to end the world.
If it's her job to care, why hadn't she even read our concerns?Ultimately, it's their choice moreso than hers, and most of your post seems full of assumptions, like "which, to me, means that you knew we felt it was time to begin the endgame and didn't care." It's unfair to assume this, especially as it's her job to care.
Yes, OFLOW was the original CM. It sounds like you would agree he failed to do his job?She's always expressed concern to me on how to get more players on the forums through competitions and proliferation, how to get more players to the server, and so on. Unfortunately, she can't satisfy everyone at once, it's difficult to handle everything while she is undergoing training, ensuring she is handling all worlds well, and opening a new world.
2) Read 1.
3) Other CMs? There are no other CMs on .us, though I presume you mean a previous CM such as OFLOW. I'm not sure how you can ask her to speak for another CM though .
If you want to take .net as an example, you would discover that there are standards for receiving cheap nobles -- the big thing we were pushing for -- and that we more than met them.Read above. I'm sorry you feel that way, but it's not nearly as easy as you think to get these things accomplished. If you want to take .net as an example (yes, it's different, but everyone seems intent on comparing them anyways), W12 was in a much more dominated state before it closed (the first world to do so).
And it closed before w1, proving that time is not the consideration when making those determinations. So those making that argument before were wrong. If size were the consideration, w2 was the smallest server.World 12 of .net, the first world to close, had no win conditions for over 3 years (possibly 4) while it was open and more dominated than W2. Just comparing it for all you who are so intent on comparisons to .net.
CMs are hired by innogames to represent them to us and vice versa. They aren't doing their jobs.What's truly baffling is that players complain on the forums instead of contacting Innogames directly, circumventing the CM who doesn't actually have definite power over the world ending.
Nauz: a swing and a miss. In the states, in order to be a volunteer, you cannot receive direct compensation. (Indirect compensation, such as free parking or in some cases, discounts, is allowed). However, direct compensation (such as cash, or some forms of indirect compensation, such as gym memberships) is not permissible -- it removes the volunteer status. Premium Points have cash value (you buy them), and are a form of quid pro quo for volunteering. So legally, in the states? Not volunteers. They could probably sue for minimum wage if they wanted to. Your argument about the soup kitchen proves the point; someone working (employed) in the soup kitchen can still have altruistic motives, but yet be an employee. The fact that they are employed (drawing a salary/wage) does not make them any less altruistic -- but it also doesn't make them a volunteer.
mattcurr: you're missing two big things.
1: We wanted discounted nobles. The world you reference received them under the .net standards, after the population went below 1000 players. We were at 600 (500 or so active players, tops) and still had not received them. At 500, there should have been the second discounted noble option.
2: W1 was closed first. W1 is further from the standard you're trying to apply.
Maybe 3? We also aren't declaring we won. We're declaring that the gamestaff won by convincing us to quit through their sheer incompetence.
u6s: not closing restarts would be fine, if the staff were capable of communicating a path towards the endgame. They are not. That is the issue here. Why was w1 closed? We're told to look to .net, but .net explains why we should have been closed before w1. Why are there no criteria for the endgame? Why can't anyone express a set of criteria?
I guess this is the appropriate time to point out that a profit model predicated around players paying for services in a game, and at the same time telling players in order to win they have to force players to quit is somewhat problematic. I'm sure you can see why that is.
Last edited by a moderator: