Character limit changes

[Nerukou]

You're saying that you're not willing to slightly adjust your RP for the sake of a better, healthier game? That maintaining your two-character-on-an-island RP is more important than helping make the game better, and more active/dynamic, for everyone?

No, we're saying we aren't willing to adjust our play style for your conception of what a better, healthier game could be. This isn't going to make the game more active, because you aren't adding anything to any of the islands, you're taking away. At best, you're hoping that we all agree with you. Your plan is wholly dependant upon our cooperation to have any chance of success. And if we do cooperate, there's a chance it might help make the game better from your perspective. I, for one, am not going to play along.

I've tried the other islands several times throughout my decade of playing, and they've always been !@#$. I have no intention of playing on them again. I also won't be renewing my donations going forward either. I disagree with this decision, and I don't feel Tom deserves my financial support until and unless this is revoked. Call it throwing a tantrum if you like, I don't care. I've told Tom before on the mailing list that ideas he had were stupid, and I'll say it here too. Whoever thought of this is an idiot.

[GundamMerc]

The argument that having 2 characters leads to a "primary" and a "support" character.  If that's true, then that's true across the board.  Someone who can't play 2 characters on a single island isn't likely to suddently be able to play 2 characters across the game.  Part of what BM's charm is the ability to take on several characters and the challenge of playing the different ones.

I'm sorry... but that is some incredibly fail logic right there. The argument is that having 2 characters on the same island leads to a primary and a support character, not that just having 2 in the whole game leads to that. There's a huge difference between playing two characters in the same place and playing two in different islands.

No, we're saying we aren't willing to adjust our play style for your conception of what a better, healthier game could be. This isn't going to make the game more active, because you aren't adding anything to any of the islands, you're taking away. At best, you're hoping that we all agree with you. Your plan is wholly dependant upon our cooperation to have any chance of success. And if we do cooperate, there's a chance it might help make the game better from your perspective. I, for one, am not going to play along.

I've tried the other islands several times throughout my decade of playing, and they've always been !@#$. I have no intention of playing on them again. I also won't be renewing my donations going forward either. I disagree with this decision, and I don't feel Tom deserves my financial support until and unless this is revoked. Call it throwing a tantrum if you like, I don't care. I've told Tom before on the mailing list that ideas he had were stupid, and I'll say it here too. Whoever thought of this is an idiot.

Well I'm glad you don't care, because that's what we'll call it. :3

And your choice on the donations. This is a free game, they aren't necessary to play. Also, it sounds like you're the kind of person who went into playing another island expecting it to end badly, and cherry picking negative things to fit that view.

[Zakilevo]

Well you've donated to get another character... It won't be necessary anymore since you can practically play on all islands without donating money.

You have to realize at this point, it is all about making the experience better for newer players not the old players.

Everyone leaves the game at some point. People who wish to stay will stay longer while people who didn't have much to do will leave. I am sure there are some people who are playing out of the old habit of logging in and pressing buttons.

[Indirik]

Your plan is wholly dependant upon our cooperation to have any chance of success.

The entire game is dependant on the cooperation of the players. If the players want to sabotage the game, there are plenty of ways they can do that.

[Medron Pryde]

I've said my piece on the point of dual characters.

Blaming them for issues caused by entirely different things is wrong.

Changing the rules to take gameplay options away from the players is wrong.

This is a game.  It should be fun.

And this change will greatly affect the fun I can have in the game.

I can't say I will leave over this.  But the more options are taken away from me as a player, the less reasons I will have to play, and the more reasons I will have to leave.

[Nerukou]

The entire game is dependant on the cooperation of the players. If the players want to sabotage the game, there are plenty of ways they can do that.

Oh, so disagreeing with you is sabotaging the game now? You're a real shining example of a community leader, you know that? Honestly, I couldn't have more respect for you as a human being right now.

[GundamMerc]

Oh, so disagreeing with you is sabotaging the game now? You're a real shining example of a community leader, you know that? Honestly, I couldn't have more respect for you as a human being right now.

Honestly, I'm almost speechless. The lack of intelligence you're showing, to make a leap of faith that wide for that kind of logic astounds me. You have to twist his words pretty hard to have gotten that out of a simple factual statement. The fact is this: in a role-playing game, players need to willingly cooperate with the setting of the game and the IC/OOC etiquette, or you quickly have things like I Can't Believe It's Not Butter being a common realm name and the whole atmosphere of the game is ruined.

[Zakilevo]

Wow....

[Moto_o]

At least its a healthier alternative to butter.

[Sovari]

Well, this is getting grim quite quickly. I mean I feel strongly against the change but some of the statements here are a bit overboard; it's a bloody game. I'm frustrated by having the second character, which I've been building up through roleplay for quite a while (dunno how long 11 IC years are so bleh), taken away by what I consider a dumb change.

If you get this worked up about a game, maybe it's time to consider playing something else that doesn't get your blood pressure through the roof when the people in charge of the game make a mistake.

[JDodger]

Even though some of the statements here have been a bit more inflammatory than required I have to agree with the general sentiment that there are a few voices on these forums that get respect more for their tenure in the game than any real benefit their ideas are bringing to the table.

Less characters per continent will bring no tangible benefit to the game and in some cases will hurt things due to restricting certain active players who want to improve situations on certain islands by using the potential influence multiple characters on a continent brings, or at the least reducing the number of units a realm can bring to a siege.

I'm still waiting to hear a real benefit this change will bring other than "so and so the veteran thinks its a good idea due their own subjective experience of having too many characters" or "we have to do SOMEthing!"

No, we dont have to do SOME thing, we have to do the RIGHT thing, or this will be another situation where dev overreaction loses the game more players than it gains.

You're not gaining a whole lot of new players as far as I can see. So your best bet is to keep the players you have and try to figure out a way to keep the scant new ones that find their way in. Game mechanics won't help the latter - that is up to established players to welcome and foster newbies in what can be an overwhelming game.

[Zakilevo]

People who will leave from this change would have left in a year or two anyway. The dev team is clearly hoping to keep what little new players we get. If we get 0 new players, the game will die by the end of next year anyway at this rate. People will always complain about changes. Why do you actually need multiple characters to achieve something? Why can't you just do it with one character?

[Sacha]

People keep saying this will mean less characters per island, as if all the doubles are going to go up in smoke. I would think that if you could no longer play two nobles on one island, you'd play two nobles on two islands. You might get a few less characters in the end because of dissatisfied players leaving, but you would still end up with more players per island than before. Players, not characters. Which can only benefit the current state of stagnation.

[Medron Pryde]

I play on the Continents I find fun and interesting.

I have played on the others and did not care for them.

Being forced to remove one character from a continent will not cause me to move a character to a continent I found boring in the past.

It will cause me to pause that character and not play the game as much.

[jaune]

I play on the Continents I find fun and interesting.

I have played on the others and did not care for them.

Being forced to remove one character from a continent will not cause me to move a character to a continent I found boring in the past.

It will cause me to pause that character and not play the game as much.

Maybby you should test those boring islands after changes kick in? I bet many islands and many realms will have changes and propably those will become more intresting.