Zucceta
Administrator
PL: 379,083
Oozaru(x10) MSSj(x15) S.Ooz(x22) SSj2(25x)
Zeni: 2290
Tag: @admin
OOC Name: therevolution
Posts: 2,309
|
Post by Zucceta on Jun 4, 2015 14:02:20 GMT
Hey all, I'm putting this up for discussion, but this change seems quite necessary.
I am suggesting a max limit on the number of multiple threads you can be in at one time. This is due to several reasons; many characters are scattered across the timeline, which is acceptable within a liquid time context, but character interactions become less muddied if someone is posting in less places at once. It would encourage people to work harder if they're in fewer threads than 5. It would also lessen the potential for abuse of the liquid time thread grading, of people stacking a bunch of threads when they're just below a PL threshold so that they can be graded unfairly (such as creating five group threads just before they hit the threshold for weights, or catch-up gains).
I would suggest a cap of 3 or 4 threads at once. Within context, such as all threads being slowed down, staff will allow leniency here.
A separate issue is the issue of word count in solo threads.
The main issue for me stems from a lot of bigger word count posts I've been reading recently. A lot of them seem overstretched, overlong and lacking in content if not writing quality. I've seen many conciser posts, which gain positive quality modifiers for making good use of writing, and the longer ones usually gain the negative modifiers for being overbearing.
I'm going to suggest a 20,000 word count cap per week, for this reason. I know it may come across as hypocritical, but I did notice it even in my own writing, and I felt I had sufficient content to explore for a larger post. It still felt overlong, even after splitting it into multiple sections.
|
|
|
Post by Hyoza on Jun 4, 2015 14:07:26 GMT
Agreed on all points. I've never liked scattering my character across multiple group threads (my max at once was 2), and I don't like other people doing it either. This is both from a continuity perspective and a metagaming one. I'd go for the lower cap of 3 threads at once - why would anyone ever need to be in more?
As for word caps in solos, I'd agree to a 20k weekly limit, and I'd also suggest that we put in place a 15k limit per solo thread. This just encourages people to write more dense and thought-out stories that don't feel so fluffed-up for the sake of WC.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2015 14:12:26 GMT
Would the caps be for graded materials or just ungraded threads there Rev?
I mean I like the ideas of people having more clear to see thoughts and actions inside of threads. The other issue would be if someone placed multiple threads in a week that they have had going for a long while within a week or two weeks and suddenly they are maxed out long before they get fully graded for the work they have done.
Also if we are proposing limits on both I say keep solo thread EC for the week separate from the non solo threads.
|
|
Zucceta
Administrator
PL: 379,083
Oozaru(x10) MSSj(x15) S.Ooz(x22) SSj2(25x)
Zeni: 2290
Tag: @admin
OOC Name: therevolution
Posts: 2,309
|
Post by Zucceta on Jun 4, 2015 14:14:45 GMT
The thread cap would just be 'at once'; if you finish in a thread, you open up one of the 'thread slot's.
|
|
|
Post by Zuni on Jun 4, 2015 14:17:08 GMT
Kinda depends how you define 'group' thread IMO. I wound up doing (I think) four with Kahr in my first week here, all 2 person threads, one of which has yet to conclude because of timing difficulties. I wasn't even particularly trying to get a lot of threads.
It would have been very frustrating if I couldn't start a new thread, intending to finish the same day because me and the partner have a lot of time to kill, because I was in multiple other threads with people who post slower. For that reason, I'm against a cap on the number of threads.
I am pro a 'max wordcount' cap on solo posts, though. I'm not sure if 20,000 words per week OR 15,000 words per thread is the better way of approaching it. It'd probably equate to roughly the same thing in most instances. If you really feel like you have way more to say than you can fit in one 20,000 word post, it is almost impossible for me to believe there's not enough stopping points that you couldn't more naturally use several threads to tell the story.
|
|
Zucceta
Administrator
PL: 379,083
Oozaru(x10) MSSj(x15) S.Ooz(x22) SSj2(25x)
Zeni: 2290
Tag: @admin
OOC Name: therevolution
Posts: 2,309
|
Post by Zucceta on Jun 4, 2015 14:19:46 GMT
Kinda depends how you define 'group' thread IMO. I wound up doing (I think) four with Kahr in my first week here, all 2 person threads, one of which has yet to conclude because of timing difficulties. I wasn't even particularly trying to get a lot of threads. It would have been very frustrating if I couldn't start a new thread, intending to finish the same day because me and the partner have a lot of time to kill, because I was in multiple other threads with people who post slower. For that reason, I'm against a cap on the number of threads. But as I said, its for the threads its not a cap on threads per work, its how many threads at a time. You said you were in four threads last week, but three of them are finished; were you in all four at once?
|
|
|
Post by Zuni on Jun 4, 2015 14:28:16 GMT
I wasn't, but it isn't hard to imagine I could have been. I think one thread finished a day before the next thread started.
Ultimately this is a rule which prioritizes IC consistency over OOC convenience; I can see the appeal. I just would prefer to err towards OOC convenience because IC consistency is something I'm more than happy to handwave.
|
|
|
Post by Pah'mazhan on Jun 4, 2015 16:27:18 GMT
I'm grossly in favor of limiting the amount of threads someone can be in at once. I think it allows for more character development per thread, more thought put into each post, and overall more character development, I think.
Word Count per solo post I'm also in agreement with, 20k per week sounds good to me.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2015 16:35:55 GMT
I've always been more of a fan of Static time when it came to RP. Gives more consistency and thought to people. So I'm glad to see a suggestion to limit thread counts to a more comfortable number.
As for the Solo WC limit, I don't mind too much either. 20k sounds delish.
|
|
Vi-Poi
Administrator
Premier of Earth
PL: 434,410
Soul(x40P), Overdrive(x43)
Zeni: 1,247
Tag: @vipoi
Posts: 2,833
|
Post by Vi-Poi on Jun 4, 2015 17:41:01 GMT
Hey everyone I'm personally a big fan of liquid time, it allows much more freedom of RP, and the amount of convoluted work and confusion that can be made on more static RPs in enforcing good static time is infamous. For those reasons, I don't agree with back-in-time rules for PL awards, LMB, etc., mainly because tracking who had LMB during that time period of the post and what their rewards could have been for their PL will become very very difficult. It will be near impossible to police someone doing it dishonestly. Thread caps I'm leery of for a couple of reasons, I'll try to list them out here. - There would be no WC limit to these threads, so it doesn't really slow a person's progression, it just limits their options. - I don't feel like progression needs to be slowed at all. Wait til you guys stop getting those nifty progression bonuses, you'll see what I mean. - It will make people rush through threads. It will put artificial pressure to end threads more quickly. - Most importantly, it will also have the tangential effect of making all threads smaller in the # of participants, because each person will be limited to a total # of threads, meaning the total possible amount of any thread participant number will be very small. When the base becomes more and more rarified across the planets, it will be even more noticeable. A lot of people's Opens will be unanswered, and that could create negative consequences for our playerbase. - It could, for this reason, form cliques and discourage new interactions rather than encourage new interactions. I'm fine with an upper limit on solo posts, I agree there needs to be something there.
|
|
|
Post by Kaula on Jun 4, 2015 17:58:24 GMT
I do not think they should be limited. But that's just my opinion.
|
|
Zucceta
Administrator
PL: 379,083
Oozaru(x10) MSSj(x15) S.Ooz(x22) SSj2(25x)
Zeni: 2290
Tag: @admin
OOC Name: therevolution
Posts: 2,309
|
Post by Zucceta on Jun 4, 2015 18:09:47 GMT
A further point of note; if you've hit your max 'thread cap' limit and a saga/DE opens up, you may join it. HOWEVER, remember that once you're in a DE you cannot start or join any other threads, regardless.
|
|
|
Post by Zuni on Jun 4, 2015 18:15:15 GMT
Vi-Poi summed up many of my concerns far more eloquently than I would have done.
I genuinely feel the 'max threads' thing would become an unfair pressure on those whose time - for whatever reason - is limited. It goes from being not a problem at all, to 'you are monopolizing one of my slots unless we finish this RP', and that is a negative pressure on quality. This came up in the cbox when the suggested fix to this was just to leave the thread or end it early if it is an issue - which is a solution. It is also a solution which is going to cut down on the natural flow of the RP in an unnecessary way.
I also agree with Vi-Poi that PL shouldn't be awarded based on when the scene was done, but what your PL is as the scene is graded. This immediately stops all weird potential weight gain/LMB boosts and associated loopholes by standardizing the rate at which PL is earned. I'm not sure what the advantage is to doing it any other way.
|
|
|
Post by Liang on Jun 4, 2015 21:23:17 GMT
Thread count limit i'm a bit leery of. WC on solo posts I agree could use a cap.
|
|
|
Post by Zuni on Jun 5, 2015 11:51:24 GMT
I'm also going to throw out an alternative to a 20,000 wordcount per week cap on solo threads.
Instead, I suggest you make it 4000-5000 wordcap per thread. Longer posts will have to be split into a 'part 1' and 'part 2' etc.
20,000/week doesn't prohibit someone throwing out huge threads which are tough to read and difficult to keep engaging, it just means they can only do one or two of those a week. I think 5000 is a good number personally, and it'd only mean a (slight) increase in the amount of wordcount someone can put out whilst encouraging each individual thread to remain tighter and more focused than is currently the case. Plus if you've got stuff you want to explore over 10-15-20k you can still do that, but you're encouraged to split it up for ease of reading - which I imagine would make it much more pleasant on grading staff.
|
|