StarGateWars Forums

anouther part of the problem is people who put these idears forward dont listen to the responces and just bull headedly plow on with ill thought out idears,
and setting war ingame to anybody who questiond them or puts valid points up

Mathlord wrote:Sure it's hard, but this is a game. It's not supposed to be easy street all the time.

Guild wrote:

Mathlord wrote:Sure it's hard, but this is a game. It's not supposed to be easy street all the time.

Indeed. Quit **Filtered** over every little thing.

I agree that the fighting is a cancer but it is not the root of the cancer. Good ideas are shot down because one group doesnt like the one that posted, bad ideas are implemented because the group that shot down the good ideas screamed the loudest or got there first or however it all worked out. The game has lost it uniqueness, its flavor and things are being done to suit a specific group (no matter who it is) and not for game as a whole (whether directly or indirectly) has done allot of damage.

I think back when the houses was created it was a decent idea and perhaps could have taken off but then the covert and defensive update coupled with the alliance functions made the game way too defensive and thus took away the ability of most to actually play it competitively. Now all of these things could have worked but the "little guys and gals" were left out there to be fed on by the big monsters and quite frankly they have no chance at all. If the ability to play a game effectively is taken away then LOL who's going to bother? Especially with the games that are out there now,

What could happen, or SHOULD have happened is an actual council made up of a few members from each alliance that would gather thoughts and opinions from their own group, be it alliance or playing mates and presented for discussion for ALL. But I fear it is too late (maybe not) because the number of people packing it in right now due to the way the game works and the rediculous politics going on has just become a complete turn off.

At one time I had some answers as to how to help this from a broad view perspective, but I am afraid the mud slide is too far down the mountain to save the town.

As far as the game itself goes, the gap of power, and the ability of those at the power end of the stick and their ability to touch those at the weak end is bad and has been magnified with the last few updates to make the game defensive. ts been ruined and like it or not its the new blood that is the life of this, and we have NONE. and will probably not get any. Sad to say it, but it is what it is.

Dark Lord Tacoma wrote:anouther part of the problem is people who put these idears forward dont listen to the responces and just bull headedly plow on with ill thought out idears,
and setting war ingame to anybody who questiond them or puts valid points up

because they want to have an advantage from an "idea"

the update history is quite full of them

renegadze wrote:Or maybe it's the clear lack of a Game Admin in that area......many of the things people are arguing about could easily be quashed if Admin turned up from time to time and say things "I like that idea" or "that's never going to happen"

Once people get a notion of what type of update is both possible and probable then it will help fine tune the debates.

Like any debate you need a "Chairperson" with the lack of this we just keep going round and round.

This I agree with, a Game Admin does need to get themselves involved in the suggestions section more. But even if there was a miracle happen one day and a game admin did start showing up more and more often to read these and give input etc we need to resolve the problem of constant fighting and mud slinging. I would not want to direct a Game Admin to a thread in current existence that starts with an update idea and then goes on for 10 pages of fighting and bickering with a few constructive posts losts between them all.

We need to start somewhere. It is not for me to say who needs to change, or what needs to change or even where to start, but I think that the constant fighting in suggestion threads would be a very good place to start.

Dmonix wrote:Personally I feel that anyone who puts up a suggestion for game improvement should list it in the format

Yes, I believe this would help make suggestions much clearer and constructive.

MajorLeeHurts wrote:I think the bigger rift in game is between the Mods and the players. This is where I see the arguing. I think there has been many threads recently where" Talking to the mods" has been a failure. I dont think anyone is at fault individually, and I dont have a clue how to fix it. What I do know , for me its discerning and unfriendly and forces me to reconsider why I even read it or try to participate. If this how the long term players feel, I can only imagine how it looks to new players.

Sorry but i see more arguing in suggestion threads these days and it's not between mods and users.

GeneralChaos wrote:On the 2 topics about capping things, admin should have stepped in and stopped them, he stated in another topic that hard caps would never happen, but anyone who did not read that topic will not know he said it, and thus the arguing from all sides continues in them topics.

I agree. I had seen that post too. I had meant to quote it in the other thread, but I got side tracked.

Mathlord wrote:Why doesn't everyone stop trying to fix the game every time something doesn't go right for them and instead play it?

I agree that not all the suggestions are necessary and cause more problems than necessary. Sometimes suggestions are made because it is actually needed, sometimes because someone thinks it should do something different, and sometimes because people are bored and want something fresh and new. i won't go in to the pros and cons of those but all suggestions should really be focused on the great good of the game and considered as to whether it is actually needed. For example, trying to help the new starters catch up a little bit I feel is needed, as it is for the greater good of the game.

Juliette wrote:I object to the use of the word 'cancer'.. and I will point out the irrelevance of pointing out that it is raining when we're all getting wet.

I used the word cancer as an analogy.... i won't apologise for that.

Juliette wrote:All this **Filtered** up mod arrogance. We're not something special. We're regular users with, indeed, more responsibilities. Learn your damned place and show the community why you should be in this position. (And don't write essays on it. Acts, not words.)

Well one is being a little madam aren't we? I have shown no Mod arrogance in this thread, in fact I am not speaking as a Mod. Get the fact I'm a Mod out of your mind and see the fact that this thread is about the problems of the game not growing and some of the reason as to why.

Jedi~Tank wrote:I agree that the fighting is a cancer but it is not the root of the cancer. Good ideas are shot down because one group doesnt like the one that posted, bad ideas are implemented because the group that shot down the good ideas screamed the loudest or got there first or however it all worked out. The game has lost it uniqueness, its flavor and things are being done to suit a specific group (no matter who it is) and not for game as a whole (whether directly or indirectly) has done allot of damage.

Yes that's a big problem, ideas getting shot down because someone doesn't like it yet don't give constructive feedback as to why it is not good, or provide alternative ideas.

What is needed is for people to discuss the ideas and if two sides have differing suggestions and the pros and cons of both sides are discussed in a good manner then that opens up the opportunity for compromise. Maybe the differing ideas could be merged somehow that may please more people. But in the state of the suggestion threads now there is no chance for that.

We all want in a perfect world for Game Admin to frequent the suggestion threads, but I personally wouldn't direct him to a thread that's 10+ pages long of arguing. let's start somewhere and try to work together on suggestions.

i know it's probably a waste of breath, but I always have hope.

Another thing you have to remember, espically if your looking at activity ingame, all games have a life span, some longer than others, Gatewars is pushing what 7 years now, it terms for an online game thats pretty dam good, espically as this game doesnt have a massive company backing it etc,

But with all games, there is however a life span, and it doesnt matter what you do, it will come to an end, everyone knows that this game maybe has 2 years left in its current state, before something really major needs done.

Clarkey wrote:

Mathlord wrote:Why doesn't everyone stop trying to fix the game every time something doesn't go right for them and instead play it?

I agree that not all the suggestions are necessary and cause more problems than necessary. Sometimes suggestions are made because it is actually needed, sometimes because someone thinks it should do something different, and sometimes because people are bored and want something fresh and new. i won't go in to the pros and cons of those but all suggestions should really be focused on the great good of the game and considered as to whether it is actually needed. For example, trying to help the new starters catch up a little bit I feel is needed, as it is for the greater good of the game.

Fair enough, there's just a big difference between "I think this would be a cool new addition to the game" and "I got massed too easily so let's make it harder...or it's too hard to mass that dude so let's make it easier".

GeneralChaos wrote:But with all games, there is however a life span, and it doesnt matter what you do, it will come to an end, everyone knows that this game maybe has 2 years left in its current state, before something really major needs done.

That's a very valid point, but the pretty special thing about this game is that we keep saying it's on its last breaths, but it's still here. We were saying it's going down two years ago...hell even four years ago some were saying that. Of course this game has a time limit, but we've done a great job keeping it interesting. Ironically enough, one of the things that has kept it so interesting is all the bickering and the hot tempers. It's drawn some people away from the game, but it has made many of the rest of us so determined and angry that we'll stick it out longer just to spite the other guy

GeneralChaos wrote:Another thing you have to remember, espically if your looking at activity ingame, all games have a life span, some longer than others, Gatewars is pushing what 7 years now, it terms for an online game thats pretty dam good, espically as this game doesnt have a massive company backing it etc,

But with all games, there is however a life span, and it doesnt matter what you do, it will come to an end, everyone knows that this game maybe has 2 years left in its current state, before something really major needs done.

Very true. We have had a good run. *reminisces* Young as I am. So what happened between then and now? Aside from a general downturn in the attitude all over the internet, selfrighteousness growing by the day..

And then, as Math says.. perhaps this fighting is actually the adrenaline keeping the dead person alive. Would explain why newbies either become .. 'bad' .. or run off scared.

Mathlord wrote:

Clarkey wrote:

Mathlord wrote:Why doesn't everyone stop trying to fix the game every time something doesn't go right for them and instead play it?

I agree that not all the suggestions are necessary and cause more problems than necessary. Sometimes suggestions are made because it is actually needed, sometimes because someone thinks it should do something different, and sometimes because people are bored and want something fresh and new. i won't go in to the pros and cons of those but all suggestions should really be focused on the great good of the game and considered as to whether it is actually needed. For example, trying to help the new starters catch up a little bit I feel is needed, as it is for the greater good of the game.

Fair enough, there's just a big difference between "I think this would be a cool new addition to the game" and "I got massed too easily so let's make it harder...or it's too hard to mass that dude so let's make it easier".

GeneralChaos wrote:But with all games, there is however a life span, and it doesnt matter what you do, it will come to an end, everyone knows that this game maybe has 2 years left in its current state, before something really major needs done.

That's a very valid point, but the pretty special thing about this game is that we keep saying it's on its last breaths, but it's still here. We were saying it's going down two years ago...hell even four years ago some were saying that. Of course this game has a time limit, but we've done a great job keeping it interesting. Ironically enough, one of the things that has kept it so interesting is all the bickering and the hot tempers. It's drawn some people away from the game, but it has made many of the rest of us so determined and angry that we'll stick it out longer just to spite the other guy

True the war of will's..well I look at it this way, when I started there was usually 700 to 1200 people on the ticker there, now its steady in the 200's. I think we can bring it back up BUT we have to to it together and that will mean sacrifices.

Jedi~Tank wrote:

Mathlord wrote:

Clarkey wrote:

Mathlord wrote:Why doesn't everyone stop trying to fix the game every time something doesn't go right for them and instead play it?

I agree that not all the suggestions are necessary and cause more problems than necessary. Sometimes suggestions are made because it is actually needed, sometimes because someone thinks it should do something different, and sometimes because people are bored and want something fresh and new. i won't go in to the pros and cons of those but all suggestions should really be focused on the great good of the game and considered as to whether it is actually needed. For example, trying to help the new starters catch up a little bit I feel is needed, as it is for the greater good of the game.

Fair enough, there's just a big difference between "I think this would be a cool new addition to the game" and "I got massed too easily so let's make it harder...or it's too hard to mass that dude so let's make it easier".

GeneralChaos wrote:But with all games, there is however a life span, and it doesnt matter what you do, it will come to an end, everyone knows that this game maybe has 2 years left in its current state, before something really major needs done.

That's a very valid point, but the pretty special thing about this game is that we keep saying it's on its last breaths, but it's still here. We were saying it's going down two years ago...hell even four years ago some were saying that. Of course this game has a time limit, but we've done a great job keeping it interesting. Ironically enough, one of the things that has kept it so interesting is all the bickering and the hot tempers. It's drawn some people away from the game, but it has made many of the rest of us so determined and angry that we'll stick it out longer just to spite the other guy

True the war of will's..well I look at it this way, when I started there was usually 700 to 1200 people on the ticker there, now its steady in the 200's. I think we can bring it back up BUT we have to to it together and that will mean sacrifices.

ok fair enought the game needs altering this we can all agree on but the main problem is there isnt the people coming and even trying the game i have never seen a advert for this game online whilst on u-tube countless outher mmodnd type games advertise but not this on so there is no wonder we dont get manny outher players this isnt our fault it is jason aka forum who needs to act now

I agree but I disagree..for example, DDE recruitment never relied on anyone for advertisement, we rely on Jason to make sure the game is kept balanced and playable for all. Even in our other games we rely on the members for the advertisement as we not only advertise the game itself, but also our community.

I'll just go ahead and say it.

The real cancer of this game is lack of genuine interest by admin for it.

There. We all know it but most of you don't want to say it cos then you won't get your way in admin meet private chats, where the real meat and potatoes of decision-making goes on.

The lack of an unbiased administration that would take an active role in shaping and guiding this game is the cancer of GW. Admin is detached and relies on an "old boys club" for direct input and guidance of development. All the members of said club are competitive players and by default emotionally vested and partial to solutions.

It's not a coincidence that virtually all major updates drop when the old club gets into an in-game war lol.

And the "brightest idea" proposed to break free from the downward spiral brought upon by the armchair quarterbacks being given field time by said old guard? A "council of alliance reps to come up with updates". Yes, lets formalise the bane of GW and give admin even more of an excuse to run the game only by distant proxy.

The problem with this game is that it's left to the players to actively develop and shape it. Which is not a problem as long as administration has a separate vision it tweaks based on player feedback but ruins everything when administrations only modus operandi is to swing left and right between the tug of war that the players have going on by the nature of things. There is a Mojo Rising in each and every one of us and you can see it from a mile away in most suggestion threads.

Like Mathlord said it, we don't play GW, we co-develop it. The vocal forum minority at least. THAT is this games problem. And it's not the players fault, its admins. For not knowing/caring about the game enough to be able to develop it and instead relying on partial and very POV limited blueprints that in term produce one disastrous update after the other.
At the end of the day, who can blame the players, when the most vital part of any major war for the past few years has always been to most successfully lobby admin for favorable tweaks. Big surprise that this topic and the suggestion forum is a is a hot bet of activity at this very second again eh lol? When no name alliances duke things out there doesn't seem to be as many issues lol.

Too many chefs spoil the soup. The solution is not to let more of them in the kitchen or to form an even more old boys exclusive comite of chefs that will claim some universal representation and enlightenment in the name of every newb. Its to have a proper professional chef in the kitchen and patrons in the dining room.

A longterm vision that isn't derailed every admin meet when admin gets flooded with private chats "explaining stuff to him" and a playerbase forced to face the fact that "the game is like this, it's the same for everyone and no you can't have it custom tailored every 2 months" is needed.

I'm not saying it would be easy to brake from the constant selfinflicted damage control yo-yo ride mode GW is stuck in, but there you have it, if it were easy it wouldn't be a problem.


P.S. Oh and $ fueling inflation isnt helping lol.

Brdavs wrote:Too many chefs spoil the soup.

^^ This.

Read through a couple of admin chat logs and seen nothing prosperous for the game itself. Just a lot of menial and ultimately biased suggestions going on... stuff that 'sounds cool' even though it screws up several other game mechanics.

~Phoenix~ wrote:

Brdavs wrote:Too many chefs spoil the soup.

^^ This.

Read through a couple of admin chat logs and seen nothing prosperous for the game itself. Just a lot of menial and ultimately biased suggestions going on... stuff that 'sounds cool' even though it screws up several other game mechanics.

Your right, I have been to a very few chats, 2 recent ones were held for announcements only on items that were never discussed in public.