User:Jen/Boring Stuff

Righto...some conclusions after a month of research and headaches. Quite different from my first impressions two months ago, probably will be different six months hence.

And, honestly -- read the title. BORING STUFF. Ignore! Go away! Play the game! Look at the pretty templates on my main page! Unless you have a good reason to be reading this...like if I told you to come here or something. This is so I have handy stuff on hand to throw at people if they ever get mad at me. And so I don't annoy any more people than I have to. And because I iz a hiztory major.

Notes to self

• Even the most faulty or problematic or overgrown institutions started for a good reason -- to fill some necessary gap, to correct some greater ill. See bounty hunting and the RG. Heck...see PKing. See combat revive, opposition to combat revive, see scorch the earth. Understand the how and the why of their origin, and you will not hate them. Indeed, you will probably come to value them.
• There is a fundamental conflict between players who favor the development of established institutions and conventions, and those who favor a kind of libertarian anarchy. Respect your opponents -- they've thought through their choice as well.
• Your preferences are not those of all players. The ones you least understand, the ones you think are the most detrimental and damaging to the game...these are the ones you MUST work to understand.
• When the player base shifts, the game changes. Adapt or die. 'Tis part of the craziness and fluidity of the game.
• Ability to embrace change, not clinging to the old ways...I'll bank on this being the heart of the pubbie debate.
• Kevan was fine with the DEM's alt policy.
• Understanding has its limits. Farther out than you think, but yes, limits.

Further Evilness

• In a city where death is a minor inconvenience, PKing is a 100% legitimate gameplay option.
• The greater the zombie threat, the less acceptable PKing becomes (and the BETTER it needs to be done). The greater the percentage of survivors, the more essential PKing becomes to a vibrant game.
• The only PKers I object to are those who don't have the decency to fire off some witty comment or passable rationale before offing folks.
• Malton should be a diverse place, full of lots of vibrant groups, each with their own crazy grabbag of preferred tactics and policies. Often diametrically opposed to those of other groups. Gray tapioca uniformity, BEGONE!
• If I could successfully play Hearts with myself as a kid, I should be able to ignore information distinct to one alt when I switch to another.
• Separate lives means separate lives. Don't stick your alts in groups supporting the same bloody style of play, policies, boards, and tactics.
• Err...but what does this mean for my two dual nature alts? Eep.
• Any publicly available info should be exploited. And ingame spying, zambah spies...heck yeah. The fact that there's groups employing various "gray tactics" makes the game more interesting all around. But private boards should be combated by better organization and other private boards. Sun Tzu be damned...forum/group infiltration is not legitimate.

• I post on the bounty/PKer threads mostly if I think something is highly amusing.

Wiki politics

• It's just a FECKING BROWSER GAME. In beta testing, no less. Holy Moses -- can't we all just get along?
• Personally, I think Kevan probably just reads the suggestions as they're proposed, and ignores the votes. I would.
• Swiers and Wan Yao seem like awesome folks. Any Project Welcome guys are also cool.

Stuff I Rather Like

• Monroeville, sans perma-headshot. When I was first playing, I found Monroeville a heck of a lot more fun than Malton. It's less established, and easier for new people and factions to impact things and make a difference. Plus I liked the threat of no revivification. ("Zombies hunting down the last survivors" would still be my preferred endgame).
• The PK debates on 28.02. They were the main reason I logged into Monroeville for a while.
• Modern Suburbia: Surviving Level One and Grim's guide to staying alive. I laughed muchly. And they're right.
• Groups that talk in-game. Life gets boring when you're just whacking, searching, and running. I appreciate the "wasted" AP.
• Groups that are direct and efficient.
• PKer groups with a good rationale. Or a sense of humor. That goes for individual PKers, too.
• At the moment, zombie buffs. Partly because the 65:35 ratio is a bit ridiculous, but mostly because there's hardly any risk as a survivor (I never rarely die unless I get stuck outside).
• Is it bad that I like mall sieges? I know they're a waste of survivor AP and all...but they're fun.
• Project Welcome
• The Wiki Code Stealers

Groups I Rather Like

• The Big Prick -- combat revives be damned, this is the most interesting and exciting idea for a survivor group that I've seen.
• Philosophe Knights -- it's a brilliant idea for a group. It made me rethink my knee-jerk negative stance on PKing. I almost joined.
• Malton Medical Staff -- I almost joined them, too. Talking ingame? Maintaining a VSB hospital? Humor as a staple? Heck yes. I care about Roftwood as a survivor because of them.
• Creedy Guerilla Raiders -- It's a brilliant idea for a PKer group. My friend who introduced me to RG was/is a member. The Philosophe Knights made me rethink PKing; the CGR made me rethink everything else. From metagame tools to bounty hunting to griefing to the definition of zerging to revive point killing to forum spying to guilt by association to my own overarching vision of what Malton should be like.
• The Opportunists -- how I like to play. See also Dual Nature, for a slightly more aggressive version.
• U.S. Army Infantry -- Aside from being American when consensus is that Malton is in Britain...they seem a good group that has their act together. I considered joining them as well, before I went dual nature. Well...and I don't particularly like their alt policy either, but, hey.
• Ridleybank Resistance Front -- *in awe*
• The Kilt Store -- Non-trenchy survivor group...with kilts! I care about Nichols Mall when I'm a survivor because of them.
• LUE -- direct, efficient, funny, and a blast to fight against
• Spartans -- emphasize courtesy, and yell stuff about Persians while killing DEM and bounty hunters. What's not to like?
• MCDU -- yup. :) They go into danger zones and get stuff done. Then quietly leave.

The DEM

• Handy prolegomena: Well, there's the debate about DEMON. And me asking the DEM a lot of questions, starting here. Father Thompson gives wonderfully thorough answers about a lot of matters. See also An Open Letter, for an RP-centric perspective. Post #2 = a summary of a lot of my thoughts on Malton, and why I've decided to devote an alt to going after the DEM. Also of interest would be the EMLN Constitution. It's got plenty of problems, but is helpful in jump-starting paradigm shifts. And one can't forget The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. Probably why I decided to play the revolutionary game in the first place. Other interesting threads to read are the PRO SURVIVOR? debate (about the Rogues Gallery vs. the DA Blacklist), and Where have all the Bad Guys gone? (the DEM and the Philosophe Knights argue about the definition of pro-survivor, among other things).
• I see the DEM as one group, with multiple sub-branches. Like the RRF, or the Fortress, or the US Army Infantry. This is in part because of how they choose to recruit, in part because of their homogenizing academy, and in part because of the similarity in their supported policies. (Though Axes High and the MCDU act more like local/mobile groups than the others do).
• I'd say my CGR alt goes after them for reasons that are 60-80% RP ('cause every large governmental-ish group needs a rebel-ish group), 20-30% personal support of local fiefdoms (and wanting folks to check them out before they default to the DEM), a dash of annoyance with inefficiency, a dash of protesting the use of certain metagame tools, and maybe a pinch of sheer black-heartedness? Or something like that.
• Like any group worth its salt, they support and publicize a certain selection of policies and tactics -- and quite popular, effective, and solid ones at that. I think there's other tactics and policies equally valid, and perhaps even better...but that doesn't make the DEM's choices bad. Those choices are in large part what shapes their character. They've also got a distinctly unique structure...what other group scatters its people ALL over the city? Sweet! DIVERSITY! They've also got those crazy ribbons and awards and ranks, which make my eyes cross, and seem like bureaucratic red tape, but, hey. Some people like that and gravitate toward that. The DEM has established a distinct and recognizable style of gameplay. It's one option among many for players -- and apparently an attractive one. Basically, they make Malton a more diverse and interesting place by their existence. And fill a necessary niche.
• So long as people have thought through their reasons for joining, I've got no beef with them. With their vision for Malton, sure...but not really with them.