Poll: Which do you prefer?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
5 day years
30.21%
29 30.21%
7 day years
69.79%
67 69.79%
Total 96 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 day years vs. 7 day years
#31
if DR no longer scales with age and you can make at whatever age you want,
and you can just change the # of year ticks required to alter DR (or better yet, not use year ticks at all),

is there any reason not to? the timescale feels like it pressures you to be crazy active as is
#32
Why not six days?

[Image: BbJ0Z55.gif]
#33
I feel like 7 days is too long. Given a lot of things are depicted by year changes. Yet having longer time can be fun in some ways but screeeeeeews other things up. In my honest opinion there's a few topics that can be gone around the campfire like Age Nerfs, new characters via two pcs, or even actual nerfs via temps. It can give more dev, but we already have a pretty active group of people. Some people just afk years away anyway after a while. We have some people who make 20+ Dev logs for something through actual story only to be denied due to age, or denied because they aren't active enough (when they might be), but there's just no point making it longer when changing the dial by 2 can really screw it up. But ranting aside?

I dont agree with 7 days. 5 days is fine, 6 maybe by an extreme.
#34
(09-18-2023, 11:15 PM)MutesToCry Wrote: I feel like 7 days is too long. Given a lot of things are depicted by year changes. Yet having longer time can be fun in some ways but screeeeeeews other things up. In my honest opinion there's a few topics that can be gone around the campfire like Age Nerfs, new characters via two pcs, or even actual nerfs via temps. It can give more dev, but we already have a pretty active group of people. Some people just afk years away anyway after a while. We have some people who make 20+ Dev logs for something through actual story only to be denied due to age, or denied because they aren't active enough (when they might be), but there's just no point making it longer when changing the dial by 2 can really screw it up. But ranting aside?

I dont agree with 7 days. 5 days is fine, 6 maybe by an extreme.

I get that longer cycles can get in the way of some things, but I don't think the clock's interaction with apps is a problem more than apps being based on the clock rather than quality of proposals/logs for development in this case. 

Which... I'm not sure is the sole reason some apps get denied? Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm just trying to draw a bead on the conversation here.
#35
(09-18-2023, 11:23 PM)Maromar Wrote: I get that longer cycles can get in the way of some things, but I don't think the clock's interaction with apps is a problem more than apps being based on the clock rather than quality of proposals/logs for development in this case. 

Which... I'm not sure is the sole reason some apps get denied? Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm just trying to draw a bead on the conversation here.

No, one of the metrics apps are based on is time since creation. Which, usually, means years. (From my experience, haven't been on the app team in like a month luh mao)
[Image: image.png?ex=6547aa08&is=65353508&hm=f3a...54dc6db9e&]
#36
(09-18-2023, 11:25 PM)ACuriousGrey Wrote:
(09-18-2023, 11:23 PM)Maromar Wrote: I get that longer cycles can get in the way of some things, but I don't think the clock's interaction with apps is a problem more than apps being based on the clock rather than quality of proposals/logs for development in this case. 

Which... I'm not sure is the sole reason some apps get denied? Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm just trying to draw a bead on the conversation here.

No, one of the metrics apps are based on is time since creation. Which, usually, means years. (From my experience, haven't been on the app team in like a month luh mao)

Ah, IC years rather than ooc days or impact? That's kind of weird. How heavily would that be weighted against quality rp/interesting concepts?
#37
(09-18-2023, 07:04 PM)Maromar Wrote: I'm in favor of 7 days years because I love eternia, but I have a life, and I have other writing projects and rp games that desire my time. Additionally being on such a short timer while not having a solidified position in the community and still bumbling my way forward to nail down how dev and just the game in general works leaves me with the fear that my first character may hit old age before I get comfortable or connected enough to do anything significant (I think it was touched on above, but 5 day cycles may in fact, alienate a good chunk of would-be-players with less time to dedicate to the game).

Adding to this, there definitely is that impact of irl versus ic. I know personally I'm working full time plus graduate school and at times I just want a break but a lot of times I don't feel like I can.

I'm less concerned about age, I've played characters long into their age DR and still done things but there is a concern in others looking at your "yearly activity" icly. If the year is extended you're not necessarily missing "months" or "years" of time and it opens that door to take a day or two to recharge without missing anything.

Especially when you're actively doing trying to dev something or leading a faction / group there becomes that nagging sense of 'I have to be online. I have to be active every single day.' I think having those few extra days may help relax that internal panic / self or even imposed expectation.

It may seem a little long to those with more free time, but I think the BG3 extension showed that it can be done and grants more leniency to game-life balance.
#38
[Image: IMG_9536.png]

I’d say try it for a month or two, resurvey, see what happens.
Because the poll so far speaks loudly!
#39
Trusting Eternia players to know what they want.

lol lmao

[Image: unknown.png]
#40
shut up and get on league


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)