Improve Cabals and the new player experience by taking some cues from 1.0 cabals?

Problems to be solved or toned down:

1. Cabal promotions can have huge OOC (and entirely out-of-game) delays

2. Cabals are very challenging for new players

3. "The game starts at 50"

4. New players have too much to learn at 50

Tactics:

1. Simplify the rank structure to leader, elder, and member. (Skills would be available as soon as the character reached the proper level.)

1.5 No cabal admission after level 30. (Must be 30 or below to join)

The 2nd tactic is listed as 1.5 because it's ineffective by itself.

How does it help?

It forces everyone who wants to be caballed to stop at 30 and actually play the game. 

1. More characters available to interact with new players for whom getting to 30 is an accomplishment.

2. More & better characters for qrace wanna-bes to fight. It makes that part of their requirements noticeably less trashy.

3. Most of the game might still be at 50, but now a chunk of it is at 30 - in the reach of new players.

Get more new players caballed. 

1. Being a "good enough 30" is a lot easier than being a "good enough 50". Plus, being caballed will help get them to 50 - extra skills, a team, motivation (carrot and stick).

2. New players in cabals are more likely to get help and support. This leads to better players and better lvl-50 characters. 

More balance at 50

1. New-to-the-cabal players will have less to learn at 50 while they're getting their skulls caved in by experienced players.

2. An established level 50 cabal member will almost certainly have better equipment than a new level 50 cabal member. Why do they have such a large cabal skill advantage as well?

Cabal promotions

IMMs have less BS to keep an eye on. Players have less to wait on. 

Counterarguments

*The skills are rewards. *

I don't understand that position. The skills are tools to meet their cabal goal. It doesn't make any sense limiting that. That's like only giving Privates in the Army a bowie knife. "Don't worry. If you live to be a PFC, we'll give you a flintlock! Then it's only 3 more promotions until you get something made in this century. 1 more year time in grade and you can use grenades."

But there will be camping.

Of course there will be some for training and practicing. I bet it's easier to create an automated system to track campers than it is to run cabal promotions - if it becomes an issue.

Skill X is too powerful to give to members.

Sounds like it isn't balanced.

Level 30 characters can't participate in cabal wars. That's a spot that could go to someone who could fight.

1. Has a single cabal hit max membership recently? 

2. Excluding training because I don't know how long that would take, a person - especially with the right cabal skills and cabal mates - can rank from 30 to 50 in a flash. 

Clans are supposed to do some of this.

Yeah, but, in my experience, they don't.

But more people will delete at 30 if they don't get caballed.

And if they do? Isn't that better than having them play to 50 then delete? If they're deleting, then they've either not found a character that fits them and the game OR they're a munchkin and they're going to delete regardless. Let them test and learn and delete.

I think that's everything - or enough of it. What did I miss? What are the holes in the logic?

Personally, I think we may not be seeing eye to eye on the problem(s).

I think there is a problem with player investment in a single character. Once things go in a way you don't like, you don't get a dragon for your description, you fail to succeed to get your qthing, etc. People tend to delete and either re-roll or roll something else.

In either case, the investment is lost. I think the game is also structured in such a fashion as to discourage this, but perhaps there are additional steps that could/should be taken to help promote longevity in a character.

"If we let them do it, they will." You can roll as many characters as you want. Why? I think this only helps contribute to the idea that if I get frustrated, I can rage delete and move onto something else. In truth we need to also hold the players accountable to the game and overall community, which in my opinion doesn't happen, at least very visibly to me.

The OP suggests restrictions based on Cabals, however I think we need to start so much earlier.

I propose we have an account system that is tied to our Forum account. To create a character in game, you first have to submit a description and maybe a history (not sure if this may be a little too much for starting players). You are limited to only one character for your account. The description/history has to be staff approved before you can now login with your character and play the game.

I think with this account based system we would help mitigate the ease with which people could freely discard a character to roll another. Additionally we could use this to add some OOC things that long term players would enjoy, such as tracking all your players, what their pk records were, descriptions, etc. I am sure there are other ideas out there to add.

Ultimately I think we are trying to address two things:

1. Acquiring new players.

2. Player investment in the character they are playing.

This post doesn't address the first, but I think it is an important discussion. With the second I think there also needs to be an understanding that if you didn't get what you were initially after, that doesn't mean something else unexpected and awesome couldn't happen. Which is I think something all players would agree would keep them playing.

I like it, for most of the reasons listed. The game is played at 50 is a common saying in the community, for good reason. The game starts at 50 is another, and they’re both at least somewhat true. 

Shuffling cabal entrance down to level 30 gives people an opportunity to play with others at the same level cap while they rp and work towards joining an organization.  I also think it would be a good way of slowing down the reward system. Getting to 50, caballed and geared up can be done in 2-3 days by some of the top players. “Forcing” players to invest time that isn’t at pinn gives them the chance to work out their rp without the constant desire to get eq, pk, or whatever else. You’d also have the opportunity to get mentored or advised by people who are further along in the cabal. 

I think my only suggestion to change would be to add a Trusted level. Everyone gets in at member at would get I/M/V powers, but Trusted powers are typically a big boost. They should maybe be something you have to work at gaining, rather than given. 

One of my biggest arguments against it-which is easily remedied-is that if I’m in a cabal, I’m going to use guild quests to level. The cp you gain is more useful than leveling slightly faster with a group.

2 hours ago, myrek said:

Cabal promotions can have huge OOC (and entirely out-of-game) delays

They don't. Part of the players just have that perception.

I don't know what cabal to join at L50 most timea, and much less at 30.

So i get to 50 uncabaled and can never join a cabal? Sounds harsh.

Cabals are to relevant in my opinion. Players get anoyed because they think they have the right/need to attain X cabal rank to PK.

Wanna fix cabals, promotion time angst and newbie complexity with cabal?

Then flatten the cabal structure. Have only 3 ranks, and make the third give no PK advantage but only RP tools/responsability.

If there are no PK bonus at high ranks most complaints about cabal times would disappear.

Thanks for the replies. Let me try to hit them in order. (If I missed any comments, my apologies.)

1. @Chief brought up that some players don't know what they want to play until they're at level 50. @mya echoed it.

Honestly, I expected to be called out on my "only at 30" remarks. FL 1.0 was 20 years ago. I know that some cabals were focused on entrance at 30, but I also know that I got caballed at 50. I don't remember all of the details.

I didn't mention it previously because I didn't want to add any squishiness to this part of my suggestion. That said, shifting 80-90% of cabal entrances to level 30 is a big positive. Even if only 1% of members join at 50, I'm sure that game-breakers like Chief would be able to pull it off. 

1. @Cephirus addresses a different set of problems. So this isn't the place to rebut it. But his comments are worth a few replies.

2.1 I don't think you made the case for the importance of players not investing in their characters. How many potential character variations are there? That's a lot to explore. Deleting is a natural byproduct of the scavenger hunt of finding the right combo for a player. I'd love to see you write a full post on this.

2.2 I am not addressing acquiring new players at all. Acquiring players is a function of marketing and sales. I'm addressing player retention (which is a function of service/product delivery and customer service). Retention > acquisition.

1. Additional considerations - these are items that aren't actually objections, but must be addressed

3.1 @Seravin mentioned that 20 levels of leveling on cabal quests is worth a ton of CPs. That's easily fixed with a tweak to the quest value formula.

3.2 @Magick mentioned that it sucks when an enemy outside of your PK range takes the cabal item. That seems like the solution is as simple as the staff saying don't do that.

1. @Seravin had a few other comments.

4.1 He threw in a "I like it but we should keep Trusted". I'm not sold on the idea.

If it's a "big boost", then we're perpetuating the imbalance. It might be nice to have a reward tier/position, but the associated ability should lean more cool or interesting than on powerful. 

4.2 He's concerned that it would lead to less PK interaction. There might be less. But look at what is gained.

There would be more PK at/around 30. That means that new players have more chance to learn before being dropped in the deep end of level 50. And that should lead to better PK at 50.

1. @mya, you're right (other than you saying OOC/OOG considerations can't affect promotions).

Cabals might be "too relevant". But removing the PK bonus from cabal abilities is less likely to get approved than my idea and I only give me a 0.4% chance.

I think some of my M vs T consideration is a feeling of moving up in your cabal. Just using the term Elder invokes a feeling of knowledge and power, more so even than leader. Personal feelings are that Leader is a position of delegation and diplomacy. Elders are the enforcers of policy and demands if the leader. 

Elder is an esteemed position, far above just a member. Some sort of position between them would show the character is willing and able to perform cabal duties. It would also increase respect and responsibilities. 

It would also provide some padding for demotion if people aren’t doing their duty. Or promotion if they are.

On 1/26/2021 at 4:09 AM, Seravin said:

I think some of my M vs T consideration is a feeling of moving up in your cabal. Just using the term Elder invokes a feeling of knowledge and power, more so even than leader. Personal feelings are that Leader is a position of delegation and diplomacy. Elders are the enforcers of policy and demands if the leader. 

 

Elder is an esteemed position, far above just a member. Some sort of position between them would show the character is willing and able to perform cabal duties. It would also increase respect and responsibilities. 

 

It would also provide some padding for demotion if people aren’t doing their duty. Or promotion if they are.

Isn't this easily solved by just keeping a 'trusted rank' for people who are trusted in the cabal,  (Maybe they can 'recruit or something' but still) but just give everyone all the Skills up to what is essentially now T at M rank?

Then you still get tiers of responsibility for those who earn it and are being 'groomed' for higher cabal positions without restricting any of the 'power' or abilities that come with a cabal.

Love the idea Myrek, especially combined with auto-induction and promotions. It has long been my belief that FL should function like a well-oiled machine, even if we lived in a post-apocalyptic world and the only relic of humanity was internet and the FL server. People in their fallout vaults could connect and still be in cabals and play the game in full. That's how it works on my Sega, and that's how it should work here. Your idea brings us towards an optimal outcome. 

This would also create good opportunities for mentorship in cabals because a 40 or 50 level character is going to be in a position of authority both in rank as well as in cabal to the new recruits.

On 1/24/2021 at 5:19 PM, mya said:

They don't. Part of the players just have that perception.

I don't know what cabal to join at L50 most timea, and much less at 30.

So i get to 50 uncabaled and can never join a cabal? Sounds harsh.

Cabals are to relevant in my opinion. Players get anoyed because they think they have the right/need to attain X cabal rank to PK.

Wanna fix cabals, promotion time angst and newbie complexity with cabal?

Then flatten the cabal structure. Have only 3 ranks, and make the third give no PK advantage but only RP tools/responsability.

If there are no PK bonus at high ranks most complaints about cabal times would disappear.

I don't know if they are delays, or if its simply bad communication. It also changes by the month/year/cabal you are playing. I can't speak to difficulty right now but if you look out at the history of the mud its been pretty bad. I've had at least two characters who spent 1000+ hours at T with no promotion nor explanation of why. On Aelleor, I was a major part of the plot of the day. I was extremely active. Multiple watcher elders came and went. I had no idea why I wasn't being promoted and at some point rage quit the mud over it. I will stress that I am not exaggerating at 1000 hours on Aelleor. That's how long I waited until I gave up. I had a similar experience on Patreus in Knight. I was actually running an RP plot at level 10, and in Knight by level 30. I had a very positive PK ratio and a ton of RP. I killed multiple nexus elders over the months and months I spent actively at T before saying F it and giving up and trying a different mud. 

The challenge for me is how mysterious the process is, and closed/private. I feel like we need to be able to understand what it takes to get to Elder and ensure the standard is the same for all cabals. I'm all for more automation if it brings that. The number of times I've said F this and left the mud because I couldn't figure out why I couldn't get a promotion probably makes up years of my life I didn't play this mud. Its an arcane, obscure, and confusing process. I try not to jump to favoritism, but to be honest, when the process has no transparency, you have to expect users to think they are being treated unfairly. Its not important that the mud avoid impropriety-- its important the mud avoid the appearance of impropriety. The appearance is what damages the mud, not the impropriety. Cabal promotions need to be non-arbitrary or we will keep losing players who feel jilted. Its not really important if its all in their head or not. I will never know for sure whether Aelleor or Patreus would have been promoted had someone else played them, so I have to look to the fairness and transparency of the process and trust it, and it has neither any guaranteed objective metrics for fairness nor any transparency.

Well said. It’s been an issue for many many years and will continue to be until the administration changes their stance on auto promotions past V. Relying on volunteers who work various hours and take breaks themselves is a disservice to the players in my eyes. It’s not a stab at the staff, its no ones fault really, we all have different lives and playtime’s, etc.  But it’s time to realize how much it truly affects this game and its players, and make a change.

I think a happy medium can be found. Leader should be a rank only granted by the cabal immortal. Hand picked, unless couped into for those cabals that support that. Other than that, the positions should be available to the players on their own. I'd suggest using the quest system.

It's possible to build a system of "choose your own adventure" quests that drive towards an end result by testing your understanding of the canal/subcabal. Your decisions during the quests not only impact the end result, but also the steps along the way. As the quests wraps up, you can either fail or succeed based on your own decisions. This keeps it from being just a "go here, do that" chain - such quest chains ultimately feel punishing and boring, just look at druid quest, and have little to no replay value - and gives the players a sense that their decisions actually matter in ways that don't rely on having a second player involved.

For instance, when I ran Nexus, I did my promotions like this: I would allow one Pandemonium elder, and one Reaver elder. I had two Trusted players, one of each. I tasked the Reaver with something about conquest of our enemies, and I tasked the Pandemonium with undermining the effort of the Reaver. This was done with the intent of testing both of them on their knowledge of how the political climate of Nexus and its subcabals functions, testing their ability to adhere to and exemplify the ideals of their subcabals. This whole concept can be automated. It was something I was working on with Church, and should be available soon-ish as I get Church into the beta version I promised.

3 hours ago, Enethier said:

I think a happy medium can be found. Leader should be a rank only granted by the cabal immortal. Hand picked, unless couped into for those cabals that support that. Other than that, the positions should be available to the players on their own. I'd suggest using the quest system.

 

It's possible to build a system of "choose your own adventure" quests that drive towards an end result by testing your understanding of the canal/subcabal. Your decisions during the quests not only impact the end result, but also the steps along the way. As the quests wraps up, you can either fail or succeed based on your own decisions. This keeps it from being just a "go here, do that" chain - such quest chains ultimately feel punishing and boring, just look at druid quest, and have little to no replay value - and gives the players a sense that their decisions actually matter in ways that don't rely on having a second player involved.

 

For instance, when I ran Nexus, I did my promotions like this: I would allow one Pandemonium elder, and one Reaver elder. I had two Trusted players, one of each. I tasked the Reaver with something about conquest of our enemies, and I tasked the Pandemonium with undermining the effort of the Reaver. This was done with the intent of testing both of them on their knowledge of how the political climate of Nexus and its subcabals functions, testing their ability to adhere to and exemplify the ideals of their subcabals. This whole concept can be automated. It was something I was working on with Church, and should be available soon-ish as I get Church into the beta version I promised.

I think having quests for E/L will work really well for six months, until half the players have shared quest solutions with each other on discord and the quest just becomes another task people memorize. 

I also absolutely love the idea of IMM attention, but I can tell you this -- getting it doesn't feel as good as not getting it feels bad. For this reason, I think cabal promotions need to be at least semi-standardized across all cabals. It doesn't mean the tasks have to be the same, but it shouldn't be arbitrary. I, as a player, should not have to wait and hope to be engaged by a cabal imm. That's the painful part from my own experiences-- waiting and not knowing what was going on. I can say across my entire play time at FL, I don't think I've been given a task or quest by my cabal imm that lead to a promotion ever. Promotions have always come out of the blue for reasons I neither understood nor expected, and has always felt random. 

It should be triggered at some point, either automatically or I should be able to ask to be considered and given a task and then succeed or fail on my own merits. If there are requirements to receive the task, I should know what they are. I should be able to compare these with the tasks other cabals are using for their process and confirm it is roughly similar. Without transparency, no one can ever be confident any system is fair. I chat with alot of former FL players, and a while back I asked a few why they don't play-- everyone I talked to mentioned perceived unfairness in the mud. I'm not saying if its real or not, but really it doesn't even matter if its real.

Well, the whole system actually involves a multiple set of revolving quests with hundreds of possible combinations and outcomes that can depend on anything from the time of day in-game to the weather to the class/race/ethos, gender, basically anything. So while yes players can, in the short term, share quest paths... It both becomes extremely obvious to the staff when executed correctly, but also means the information you do manage to get can be wildly inapplicable to your actual experience with the quest.

Also I specifically said no Leader by anything other than imm decision, which I think is a reasonable compromise.

And while some may be outdated as cabal imms change, requirements for promotions are readily available on the forums in a stickied thread (I believe it is still stickied, anyway). These could be rolled into help files to be more accessible, though, I will grant that.

5 minutes ago, Enethier said:

Well, the whole system actually involves a multiple set of revolving quests with hundreds of possible combinations and outcomes that can depend on anything from the time of day in-game to the weather to the class/race/ethos, gender, basically anything. So while yes players can, in the short term, share quest paths... It both becomes extremely obvious to the staff when executed correctly, but also means the information you do manage to get can be wildly inapplicable to your actual experience with the quest.

This also sounds considerably more complex than any quest system we have today. I'm not saying its not a great idea-- just not sure if I expect it to be feasible in a reasonable amount of time.

Quote

Also I specifically said no Leader by anything other than imm decision, which I think is a reasonable compromise.

I don't think it is reasonable unless we know how & when that decision is made, especially if the L spot has powerful PK skills. Consider any other real world system where something is at XYZ person's sole discretion, but there are no suggested evaluation timelines, no guidelines for making the decision, nor any formal process for people who feel overlooked to get a second opinion or alternative judgment. No corporation, non-profit, community organization, volunteer society, sports team, or club I've ever been a part of would consider that reasonable, and the fact that we do here is I think simple groupthink from the fact that we've trained ourselves to believe its reasonable over several decades. 

Quote

And while some may be outdated as cabal imms change, requirements for promotions are readily available on the forums in a stickied thread (I believe it is still stickied, anyway). These could be rolled into help files to be more accessible, though, I will grant that.

The only thing I found when searching was a post that said you need 30 RP points for L. Obviously...we know that getting 30 RP points won't get you to L on its own. They don't read to me like requirements so much as bare minimums that will be applied, which doesn't make it very helpful. I would want maximums, not minimums, which is to say you will be guaranteed an opportunity to be an E/L at X # of rp points. Minimums just start the waiting game that make me frustrated. Once I hit 30 RP points I'm wondering why it hasn't happened!

That said, when I searched cabal promotion, I found many ideas thread posted over many years of many players asking for more standardization to this process. I saw one from 2020, one from 2017, one from 2018. Its clear the pbase has been asking for this for years.

Stickied in Announcements and Changes.

The forum search function is not perfect. It does not display all matches. Typically, archived posts are not displayed.

Most (all I would argue, but I say most out of fairness to other opinions) of the cabal Leader skills are nice, but hardly game-changing. It's more of a badge of pride than a significant power boost. Specifically because of the negative impact that has on everyone else who has to fight that person. 

Not to be a negative nancy, but... If you're expecting, or even hoping, for all cabals to be entirely automated at any point in the foreseeable future, you're going to be disappointed. The staff has consistently voted it down. The 1.0 era of cabals may have felt great for the popular players among the most prominent OOC rings, but they were god awful for everyone else. Compromise is the best method of getting any amount of automation that does not already exist.

The game is not, has never been, nor should ever be a "get this, do that, go there" game. To cheapen it to that point would be a disservice. I am all for innovation to improve experience, but realistic expectations and applications are important. It's incredibly easy to see your own ideas and say "this would be perfect". But speaking from a perspective of someone who implemented for years... It takes far more than that. There are many facets of the game that even a tiny change impacts, facets you wouldn't even consider before they're brought up. It's easy for us as players to say that X is what needs to happen, because doing so fits our conceptions of the game. Bias and conviction have us believing that our way of thinking is the truth of it all. But what works for one group doesn't for another. You need layers, or we may as well be Candy Crush.

As for the building of the quests, it's not hard. Quests are some of the easiest progs to do as a builder. Time consuming, but mechanically easy. Once I have the time, u can even design a sample one..pick a cabal/subcabal and I will write it.

I actually haven't specifically said anything should change or that the process should be automatic, though I did advocate for more automation if it helps. I think completely automatic has alot of problems as well. I do, however,  think there needs to be an actual process laid out. I'm not even saying what it should be. Its more important there is a process than how it is performed. Today, there isn't one, at least not that players know about. Its just wait around and see what happens.  If I were suggesting a specific thing, I would push for automated timelines & manual review with a pre-established review doc, and for those reviews to be made available to the character.

Let's say anyone who is at a given cabal or clan rank longer than 4 weeks & 40 play hours without a movement to Trusted it should trigger a review process. There should be a series of questions that are answered by the cabal imm that results in a yes/no decision. If the answer is no, the report gets sent to the player detailing why they weren't promoted. If the player disagrees, they should be able to challenge this decision to an IMP and provide logs that prove they have met the requirements. In the event the decision is yes, the report gets filed away and is now available for any future analysis of fairness. Its not entirely unlike an employee review process. This avoids the reality or perception that anyone has been "forgotten about" or "looked over" and is still imm controlled, but isn't shrouded in mystery.

On 5/2/2021 at 6:55 AM, Aidon said:

Multiple watcher elders came and went.

Don't bring me into this, Im awesome

On 5/2/2021 at 6:55 AM, Aidon said:

I killed multiple nexus elders over the months and months I spent actively at T before saying F it and giving up and trying a different mud.

Which ones? Thats the sort of thing even I would notice. 

On 5/2/2021 at 6:55 AM, Aidon said:

I've had at least two characters who spent 1000+ hours at T with no promotion nor explanation of why. On Aelleor, I was a major part of the plot of the day.

That is a LOT of hours. I mean... Even my Leaders don't have those sort of hours at T and my  characters generally last literally **years **when I am serious about them.

On 5/2/2021 at 11:22 AM, egreir said:

Well said. It’s been an issue for many many years and will continue to be until the administration changes their stance on auto promotions past V. Relying on volunteers who work various hours and take breaks themselves is a disservice to the players in my eyes. It’s not a stab at the staff, its no ones fault really, we all have different lives and playtime’s, etc.  But it’s time to realize how much it truly affects this game and its players, and make a change.

Play a character worth promoting Zroth - OOHHHH BURN.

9 hours ago, Ulmusdorn said:

Which ones? Thats the sort of thing even I would notice.

You have to understand I have always been a player who was middling at PK at best. Back in 2.0, I was the guy hanging out at central common or healer island trying to drum up RP and getting destroyed by everyone who dropped by. I was pretty much only good at hiding/running. I will never and have never ran the pbase, but on Patreus I found I was able to best 90% of the opponents I fought. I was a combo that was slightly rare at the time, a praetorian combat cleric, and I was basically a brick wall that punched back. For a while, there, I was pretty easily able to take and keep the nexus standard and run off any nexus that showed up. I also was involved in RP that lead to war with Savant & Syndicate so was also fighting those Elders regularly. 

At the time, the main people I was fighting were Zaulael / Mephisoleer / Kurvikhel / Scorvale / Fistilantus. I know I killed Zaulael & Kurvikhel, as both were pretty big wins for me. Not saying they didn't also kill me at some point. I know I claimed the standard from the other two several times but not sure if I got the kill in. You also have to understand I played this char for what was likely real life years, so I fought multiple generations of nexus elders. I am pretty sure Zaulael was rolled and ranked to 50 twice and made elder while I was at Trusted, as an example...

Quote

That is a LOT of hours. I mean... Even my Leaders don't have those sort of hours at T and my  characters generally last literally **years **when I am serious about them.

Tell me about it. I don't really track chars in months/years, but I would be very surprised if I wasn't at T on Aelleor for over 2 years and over 1 year on Patreus. 

THIS was my custom title...because I'd been in Knight so long....it seemed to be almost a running joke how old my char was and how long he had been around.

[ Dwarf ] [KNIGHT] (Hope [T]) Sir Patreus the Remnant

Hmmm can't really comment as I don't remember these characters so I don't even know how long ago this way. 

However I will say that people who think PK is a pre-requisite to get promotions in cabals are wrong. We've had Nexus L's with less than 10 kills before. just me 2c