Second: when you say "...what you are doing is not having the desired effect," I'm unsure as to whether you mean what the Zuma are doing in-game, or what all our arguing is doing on the forum. However, in the former case, if what the Zuma are doing was not having the desired effect (whatever that happens to be), I'm reasonably sure Tom would tell them to change it or remove them. And in the latter case, as I've already stated, this is an argument on the Internet. It's not going to go anywhere by its very nature. We're not going to convince Vellos and Gustav Kuriga (and the others), and they're not going to convince us, because we're coming at it from completely different premises.
I could be convinced. I just think you have yet to produce a meaningful counterargument. I have admitted I was wrong on numerous occasions, even after long arguments: just recently, the case I opened against the Zuma GM regarding torture comes to mind, or the vulgarity feature. C'mon Tim, you know me well enough to know that I don't just pick an opinion, then plug my fingers in my ears and go "I'm not listening!"
We know about this, and over the past several months, we have been working to make changes that undo the damage to the game that was caused by the old estate system and TMP. It is a difficult process, however, because everything needs to be carefully balanced, fun, and reasonably historically accurate (pretty much in that order).
This is actually a great example.
There were some serious bitchfests over TMP (and estates). Many players left. Some who liked them stayed (like myself). We said to ourselves, "We're right, we're right, the complainers are just whining because they're losing..."
But you know what? Those of us who favored old estates and TMP
were wrong. And you know what? When that was admitted, and when work began to actually
address those issues... lo and behold, things
are getting better.
Surprise! If you listen to the complaints being voiced by a significant group of players, and adapt, you can create a better game! Woah!
And you know what we have?
The luxury of telling you to piss off.
Fortunately for you, we are not exercising that luxury. We are telling you why your arguments are useless, incorrect, or irrelevant. We are engaging with you. We are, in fact, trying very hard to make this game better.
No. Your argument has been, "That's not how the Zuma were designed to be, so we shouldn't change them." Your argument has been that the Zuma should not be changed because they were not designed to be changed. It has also been argued that those frustrated with the Zuma are just playing wrong, or not thinking about the issues enough. When we have stated various strategies we have attempted, we have been ignored.
It is not true that leaving the Zuma alone means you will get left alone. It's not true. As in, "It is false." If you seriously think that's an option... then you're ignorant. Because someone out there somewhere will find a way to provoke the Zuma. It gives one or two players the power to control the destiny of dozens, based on the strength of a GM faction.
First, Tim, I'm unsure if you're right about not being able to turn a GM faction against itself. Things I've seen from other people more involved with the Zuma than you, both IC and OOC, indicate they are not so unified as you claim.
Second, even if you are right,
that's irrelevant. I'm not arguing about what strategies
are possible but about what strategies
should be possible.But making the game better does not—cannot—mean bowing to every loudmouthed whiner on the forums. If we were to adopt a policy of doing that, it would lead within months to the utter ruin of the game.
You're absolutely right. We shouldn't bow to every loudmouthed whiner on the forums. I do hope you're not characterizing me personally as a "loudmouthed whiner." Again, you know me well enough to know that I practically get glee from being on the losing side of things and watching my schemes be evicerated by other players, be it in Oligarch, Irombrozia, MR, Riombara, or elsewhere we've played in proximity to each other.
But because you don't want to bow to every loudmouthed whiner doesn't mean you should write off complaints every time their loud or insistent. You may be right that our arguments as we have stated them are insufficient (I don't think you are, but it's possible). But even if you
are right: there's still something seriously wrong that's causing all these players to be unhappy. The vibe I'm getting from you (and from the Zuma GM IG) is that you think the thing that is wrong is basically me, which perplexes me, as I was not the first person to be bothered by the Zuma. I began this whole thing because of complaints from members of Terran. I have continued because I have grown more frustrated with the Zuma.
Poll