You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Strategy and General Discussion
Moderated by Yeebaagooon, TAG

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.35 replies
Age of Mythology Heaven » Forums » Strategy and General Discussion » Concerns re. the General and Strategy Forums...
Bottom
Topic Subject:Concerns re. the General and Strategy Forums...
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
Jet_Set_Jim
Mortal
posted 15 February 2005 06:25 AM EDT (US)         
Guys

This game has been around a while now. The days of the leading players regularly exploring new strategies and finding screws / strong unit combos have faded.

More and more, these forums are (quite rightly) places where newcomers to the game can pose questions to the more experienced players. Quite often these are questions that have been asked before, but that is the nature of things and to be embraced.

But I have a real concern about the amount of junk that is written in response to a lot of queries from newcomers. Specifically I'm not talking about someone posting a new thread and making an error in their suppositions etc... nothing wrong with that... I'm talking about the increasing number of rookie players who respond to newcomers with poorly thought out responses, but state them boldly as if they are fact.

Although it would help me to emphasise my point, I'm not going to give actual, linked, examples as I'm not looking to single people out here or start any kind of flame war etc... but as an indication of the type of thing that I'm talking about:

1) If someone asks whether chickens are huntables the same as say zebras etc. - don't answer if you're not sure you know!

2) If you're not sure whether spreading villies across temples increases favor gathering rate - don't answer if you don't know!

3) If someone asks the best way to repel a Loki rush - they are basically asking the question to people who can do this at a decent competitive level (say 1700+)... they aren't really asking someone who has managed it once against a 1570 Loki player by massing hippikons and MUs. Yet inevitably the answer will come: "lol - the best way to r0xx0rz Loki is to use cav & myth. btw I am 19++ (honest but if you ask 4 an ESO nick I'll mumble and then vanish)".


Yes sir, there's plenty of this type of thing on these forums at the moment, and it's a poor thing indeed to mislead newcomers to the game. Not that it's being done deliberately - it's just that MOST OF YOU PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THIS GAME AS WELL AS YOU THINK THAT YOU DO.

So there's my moan - now here are my suggestions to help all of us forummers lift our games here:

1) Unless you're 100% sure you have the answer to a posted question, try qualifying your response a little or phrasing it as a question, eg: "Well I'm not a Loki player, but I'm fairly confident that you can utilise ranged MU such as trolls and centaurs to help you repel hersirs - you just have to micro them well. Any comments?" rather than "Use centaurs against a Loki rush".

2) And if you really don't know the answer, just don't post a crappy guess and please don't phrase it like it's emphatically true.

3) To a lot of players here - honestly, 1600-1700 is a perfectly good rating... could people stop claiming to be several hundred points higher than they are? It's painfully obvious to all concerned and we'd still listen to 16++ people!

4) The mods do a great job here, and I know that they are kept absurdly busy by flamers and gibberish posters... But is there perhaps room for a "Technical" moderator on the General and Strategy forums? By this I mean someone who most would recognise as a trustworthy exponent of the game (such as Pug or, prior to his leaving, Johnny_Deppig) - who would correct the more glaringly wrong and bad technical advice that regulary crops up?

For example, if someone were to state "massed hippikon beat all atlantean combos" (it's only a matter of time!) then this mod would be responsible for stating that this isn't true, and newcomers would trust their opinion rather than getting into a fruitless flame-ridden debate.

5) This might not be technically possible here - however many forums allow other forummers to rate their peers on a 5 star rating system. So the better or more reliable posters will gradually pick up four or five stars under their name on posts, and we'd know who to trust. Obviously post-counts are redundant information (too many spammers!) so no need for this to be added.

Well, just my rant for the day - perhaps it'll strike a chord with some of you. We need to stop misleading the newcomers to the game. And speaking personally, I've always been a staunch defender of AOMH, sometimes travelling over to AOTS to do it - but if we can't do something to raise our game here then it might be time for me to "go green" along with most of the other moderate-to-good players.

AuthorReplies:
X2C_41nT2L82Qu1T
Banned
posted 15 February 2005 08:30 AM EDT (US)     1 / 35       
Yes, I think the same. Im tired of before answering a question having to condradict some others first that said the complete contrary of a good thing to do.
Pug
Mortal
posted 15 February 2005 08:31 AM EDT (US)     2 / 35       
Does seem like there has been more of that lately. Probably a lot of xmas presents?
Shiva
HG Alumnus
posted 15 February 2005 08:33 AM EDT (US)     3 / 35       
Such threads and opinions have always existed at AoMH, but you are right, the mods need to make a better effort to try and educate and not just moderate.

We'll put forth the better part of our opinions when we notice false information going around.


.¸¸.· · .¸¸.·´ §hïvå | RágeOfHaemòn · .¸¸.· · .¸¸.·
« . ° ¤ Scenario Designer | Woad Creations ¤ º . »
Jet_Set_Jim
Mortal
posted 15 February 2005 09:40 AM EDT (US)     4 / 35       
Thanks Shiva.

Needless to say this wasn't meant as a criticism of the moderators in any way - I think you guys do a difficult job very well.

i r n00b
Banned
posted 15 February 2005 10:34 AM EDT (US)     5 / 35       
I agree with Jet_Set_Jim (though I feel offended by his state about 19++ :P )
Lord of terroR
Mortal
posted 15 February 2005 10:46 AM EDT (US)     6 / 35       
you are right im 1680+- player and im proud of it,

@ I R Noob i only know one dutch 1900++ and that Balhaar, he owned the once expert account of cL_chosenlegion


The power of hell is coming...
FoH; Forces of Hell
pete722
Mortal
posted 15 February 2005 06:28 PM EDT (US)     7 / 35       
i agree with all of it,
i wouldnt mind being one of them people, who you stated....
although i might be a little abusive for that
and also, im pretty sure there are better players then me here,
i think the biggest problem here, is that people flame so much, i have tried to do new ideas, new strategies, and if they dont work as well as another strat, im flamed...
but nice post.
LoH_Silk
Mortal
posted 15 February 2005 08:13 PM EDT (US)     8 / 35       
Very nice post Jim--I agree 100%. I am really liking the idea of a Technical Moderator, or maybe even a few of them, and I hope HG will consider it.


" I didn't particularly feel like being arrested, so I argued with the soldiers a bit. Several of them died during the argument - those things happen once in a while. Unfortunately, one of the casualties was Taur Urgas' oldest son. The king of the Murgos took it personally. He's very narrow-minded sometimes. "

" Usually, when I need a boat, I steal one. Using one of my own seems immoral somehow. "

Dax105
Mortal
posted 15 February 2005 10:29 PM EDT (US)     9 / 35       

Quote:

Very nice post Jim--I agree 100%


Quote:

such as Pug

I always believed that Pug would make a great Cherub. Perhaps it's the fact Pug's the only person with enough time and skill.

DeathAndPain
Mortal
posted 18 March 2005 06:52 AM EDT (US)     10 / 35       
Great post, Jet_Set_Jim. I love discussing stuff, but I hate arguing with ppl that obviously have no idea what they are talking about.

Another annoying thing that you did not mention is ppl responding without actually having read the thread completely. While reading all through a thread that already has many responses may be time-consuming, it is necessary if one plans on responding to it. Many ppl do not, which results in a vicious circle: Ppl repeat responses because they have not read them, which causes the thread to become even longer and future readers even more likely not to read all through it.

The worst case however, but a case that I have experienced more than once, are people that do not even read the initial text completely. The result is obvious: They have not really understood what the thread (and the original question) is about, so their response goes completely off-topic. This is the worst case of cluttering up a thread with useless junk, making it even less likely that it will be blessed with a useful response. And responding to a question that one has not even completely read or heard is among the most foolish things that can be done - in a forum or elsewhere.

Granted, this may happen to me more often that to other ppl, because the initial text of threads that I start often tend to be rather long, but hey, I never force anybody to read it or reply to it. But if one does reply, then she should have read the question completely first. Technical moderators as suggested by Jet_Set_Jim - or even normal moderators - could also have the task to identify and remove double responses (responses that repeat what another response already contained before), as well as responses of ppl who obviously did not read the complete question to which they respond.

Quoted from Jet_Set_Jim:

2) And if you really don't know the answer, just don't post a crappy guess and please don't phrase it like it's emphatically true.


I think this suggestion must be emphasized even without the second part of the sentence (although the second part makes things even worse). Someone asks a legitimate question (actually all game-strategy-related questions being legitimate as long as they have not been asked a dozen times, and a simple forum search would have revealed the answer), and gets a response like: "It might be a good idea to do xyz." (xyz being nonsense). While this responder is not claiming infinite wisdom, he is cluttering up the thread with absolutely useless and distracting information. The better approach for him would be to wait for a substantial response (so that the main question has been answered by someone who knows what he is saying), and then follow up by asking "Could you not also try xyz?". That would then be a new question, yet closely related to the original one, therefore well fitting into the thread.

Quoted from Jet_Set_Jim:

But is there perhaps room for a "Technical" moderator on the General and Strategy forums? By this I mean someone who most would recognise as a trustworthy exponent of the game (such as Pug or, prior to his leaving, Johnny_Deppig) - who would correct the more glaringly wrong and bad technical advice that regulary crops up?

For example, if someone were to state "massed hippikon beat all atlantean combos" (it's only a matter of time!) then this mod would be responsible for stating that this isn't true, and newcomers would trust their opinion rather than getting into a fruitless flame-ridden debate.


I would basically welcome this, but such moderator would have to be chosen with extraordinary care. Not only his playing skills (as well as his ability to express stuff in an understandable manner) must be beyond doubt, he must also be a very humble person. The reason is that even experts often have differing opinions on certain subjects. If one of these two is such moderator and the other one is not, then it could be tempting for the further to enforce his opinion by declaring the other wrong by means of technical moderator, period. Such abuse must be prevented at all costs.

For that reason, it is important that any technical moderator is humble enough to leave any opinion uncommented as long as it is not obvious nonsense. Perhaps he should use a different account when participating in a discussion, so that his personal statements (which reflect but his opinion) are clearly separated from his official moderator statements (which should be pretty much above discussion, as they only state the obvious from the standpoint of any good player).

Btw, the need of being humble applies to any forum moderator whatsoever, and unfortunately not many moderators comply to this. I am talking about forum moderators in general here, not about AoM Heaven ones. But on AoM Heaven, Shiva is an example for a good moderator in my opinion, while Kumar Shah is known to have taken some overbearing actions in the past (although my impression is that he has improved).

On the other hand, a good technical moderator could be allowed to use more forceful means of keeping the threads clean. A trash response, as aptly defined by Jet_Set_Jim, still clutters up a thread even if it has been commented by a technical moderator. The trash response plus the comment raise the number of thread replies by 2. Often other players will also comment on the trash response (or the moderator comment), further increasing the thread response counter. So the thread has already become quite long, although no real satisfying answer to the original question has yet been given. Many players browsing the forum index will see the thread with already 10 replies and decide that it is not worth reading through this long thread if there are already so many replies to this question.

For that reason, I would propose that a good technical moderator should not add a comment, but edit the trash response and replace it with a standard statement like "This response has been deleted by a technical moderator because it contained false information." He could also pm the author of the trash response with a short remark why he deleted the response, but this explanation should not be placed into the thread because it has nothing to do with the actual topic (as defined by nothing but the initial thread starter text).

As the result, a trash response would only increase the response counter by one, and other players would be kept from discussing the trash response because it is no longer there. This would also be an indirect - but absolutely appropiate - punishment for the trash responder, because not only has she lost her response text, but her text is publicly marked as incorrect. Even newbies will become cautious towards an advisor many of whose responses are publicly declared false. And this in turn will make ppl more careful about what they write. Nobody wants his response declared "false information", so people will double-check that what they respond is correct (raising overall posting quality). Of course these consequences make it even more obvious that technical moderators must be selected very carefully.

Another idea would be to simply delete the trash response, but that might confuse ppl who read it before and wonder what happened to it (causing additional discussion), so I prefer the edit approach as the clearer one.

Quoted from Jet_Set_Jim:

many forums allow other forummers to rate their peers on a 5 star rating system. So the better or more reliable posters will gradually pick up four or five stars under their name on posts, and we'd know who to trust.


While I have yet to see a forum that allows this, it looks like an excellent idea to me. I am confident that anything can be done if there is the will to do it. Now it is up to the guys of AoMH to decide if they are prepared to invest energy in the quality of their forums. I think they have little other choice if they want to stop the defection of good players towards AOTS. Right now it is a known fact that the elite players are already there. However, with such a quality-ensuring system on strategical threads AoMH would have something very good that AOTS does not, and that might easily lure some good players back here. As a matter of fact AOTS is also plagued with trash responses on strategical questions. They have made a good move by introducing the "ask the experts" thread, although it is not working as smooth as one could desire. Nothing AoMH could not counter - if they are prepared to take action.

Quoted from Shiva:

Such threads and opinions have always existed at AoMH, but you are right, the mods need to make a better effort to try and educate and not just moderate.

We'll put forth the better part of our opinions when we notice false information going around.


Tell me if I am wrong, Shiva, but to me that sounds like: "While doing our other work, we will try to keep an eye on that, but we do not plan on actually changing anything and dedicating a considerable amount of time or work into such a change."

If my interpretation of your words is correct, then nothing will change. I have no idea of the playing skills of you and the other moderators (you might be elite, or rookie), so I cannot tell if your skills will do for such a job. But as a matter of fact the job as technical moderator will take time, time that I believe you do not have on top of your regular work. You cannot just do this "along the way".

On the other hand you are absolutely right that "education" is the right word to describe what must be done (although this increases the danger of overbearing behavior by moderators).

Another approach to make AoMH more attractive for good players is having absolutely correct tables on all unit data here. Right now, the unit tables on AoMH are already the best you can find on the net (as far as I know), yet there are still bugs in there, bugs that have partially been there from the very beginning and never been fixed. A good example is the missing 2x damage bonus that RC get against siege units. Another is the actual damage of certain myth units that differs from what they should have in theory (e.g. fire giants).

Some unit statistics have also changed along with the introduction of the Titans expansion. An example is the ulfsark and the TA having the same hack armor, which was not the case in vanilla AoM. It would be good if the tables would somehow reflect this.

How can that precise data be acquired? Quite easily, actually. Nobody can test everything, but some player knows one fragment, the next one another. An easy approach would be to create a sticky thread in which ppl can post AoM table bugs. If these bugs are quickly fixed as ppl post them, AoM Heaven would have bug-free tables in no time, a highly interesting feature that AOTS cannot offer.

To summarize the possible actions discussed in this thread, the following options are possible:

  • Carefully selecting technical moderators according to the four prerequisites humbleness, AoM skill, language skill (ability of expressing and explaining stuff) and forum activity. Then appointing them and equipping them with the corresponding privileges as described above. Further creating a page that precisely documents the task of the technical moderators so everyone can reference it. (No task can ever claim to be done in a professional manner without proper documentation.)

  • Introducing the star system that Jet_Set_Jim proposes. This would probably require some programming on your end.

  • Fixing all incorrect or incomplete unit data in the AoMH unit and building tables. Creating a sticky thread for players to post such bugs, and frequently reading it and fixing the tables, making sure to verify posted information in the editor before inserting it in the tables. (Often enough there are a dozen different affirmations about a certain unit bonus or other trait. Only verifying in the editor can reveal the truth; there is no point in trusting anyone with this (especially not the in-game help).)

    Quoted from Dax105:

    I always believed that Pug would make a great Cherub. Perhaps it's the fact Pug's the only person with enough time and skill.


    While I remember having read stuff from Pug, I do not remember its quality, so I have no opinion on him. I do remember, however, having read good quality stuff from pete722, both content- and language-wise. Of course he would have to take great care not to be abusive with such an office.

    SeaBass might also be a good candidate, but I am not sure if he is still here.

  • Pug
    Mortal
    posted 18 March 2005 08:31 AM EDT (US)     11 / 35       
    Technical moderator = technical forum. (hardware, graphics, sound problems etc. Not technical as in unit in the game.
    Shiva
    HG Alumnus
    posted 18 March 2005 09:45 AM EDT (US)     12 / 35       
    Thanks for e-mailing me, I might have missed your reply, had you not.

    Quote:

    Ppl repeat responses because they have not read them, which causes the thread to become even longer and future readers even more likely not to read all through it.

    There is no way to remedy that. We can all be accused of pushing forth our opinions even when it co-incides with nothing else in the thread. For example, Pug's response to what you said was nonsensical. I don't think that he defined what you meant.

    Technical Moderator - Unbeknownst to you folks, the Staff of HG have had a pretty big discussion consequent to a few threads (like this one) that popped up in the community recently. Fyi, there is now a new Code of Conduct in place. There are some who agreed with the suggestion of having moderators such as these. However, those with better knowledge than me decided that it would not be a possible endeavor. I do not think that I should quote the specific reasons for why, mainly because what the authors said was not meant to be repeated without their consent in the public forums. Just know that we are not avoiding these problems. Future Heavens will take care of its forumers better than AoMH did.

    Quote:

    Another idea would be to simply delete the trash response, but that might confuse ppl who read it before and wonder what happened to it (causing additional discussion), so I prefer the edit approach as the clearer one.

    The moderators will never edit out posts at their own discretion except if that content is explicitly against the Code of Conduct; in which case we remove it and explain why. If we started editing out responses as you suggested, it wouldn't be right. For example, imagine how you would feel if I edited out your entire post and replaced it with, "Removed because I disagree with a lot of what he says - Shiva." It would lead to disagreement and tons of arguments.

    I have no right to stop you from saying your mind. In fact, a few months ago, Zen removed the moderators' ability to delete entire posts for that very reason.

    Quote:

    If my interpretation of your words is correct, then nothing will change. I have no idea of the playing skills of you and the other moderators (you might be elite, or rookie), so I cannot tell if your skills will do for such a job.

    I don't think that it is. A moderator's job is to keep the forumers from following the Code of Conduct as closely as possible. Our replying to technical questions about this game is not as crucial as the aforementioned, but highly suggested. The Seraphs often have been known to choose Moderators based on their conduct in the forumers. Skill is a secondary requirement. I said that we will do a better job of answering questions and leading neophyte forumers away from wrong information.

    As for my skills, I have played this game long enough to know every nook and cranny of it. My ratings in Deathmatch have progressed up to the Top five (the number one currently is from my clan, and has yet to beat me ), and the "Haemon" part in my signature will lead you to statistics about me. Heed not my Deathmatch rating, for that is the result of me losing intentionally to numerous players.

    Quote:

    An easy approach would be to create a sticky thread in which ppl can post AoM table bugs. If these bugs are quickly fixed as ppl post them, AoM Heaven would have bug-free tables in no time, a highly interesting feature that AOTS cannot offer.

    Bugs in AoM:TT. One existed for a long time for the game itself, but it was taken down due to Sith's request. As for the the errors in our own website, I lead you to the "Website Comments" Forum. E-mailing Angel GloryOfSparta with any relevant information would be the fastest way to rectify any such faults.


    .¸¸.· · .¸¸.·´ §hïvå | RágeOfHaemòn · .¸¸.· · .¸¸.·
    « . ° ¤ Scenario Designer | Woad Creations ¤ º . »
    DeathAndPain
    Mortal
    posted 29 March 2005 02:03 AM EDT (US)     13 / 35       

    Quoted from Shiva:

    There is no way to remedy that. We can all be accused of pushing forth our opinions even when it co-incides with nothing else in the thread.


    ...which is where moderators come into play, making sure ppl do not everything they feel like doing, but obey to certain rules that are necessary to keep a forum effective and a thread uncluttered.

    Quoted from Shiva:

    For example, Pug's response to what you said was nonsensical. I don't think that he defined what you meant.


    He did not directly respond to what I said, but his response was not off-topic, especially since the topic is set by nobody but the thread starter. Jet_Set_Jim suggested the expression "technical moderator" in the initial text, so it was well on topic to discuss that. (I just adopted the expression without thinking much about it, because I cared little for the word and more for its intended meaning.)

    Quoted from Shiva:

    There are some who agreed with the suggestion of having moderators such as these. However, those with better knowledge than me decided that it would not be a possible endeavor.


    Everything is possible implementation-wise. The key is your last word: endeavor.

    Quote:

    Future Heavens will take care of its forumers better than AoMH did.


    "did"... you are using the simple past, which indicates something that has been finished. So AoMH has been abandoned and will not receive further development? Just like ES has abandoned AoM and will not even fix the most blatant bugs (Healing Spring deconstruction) any more?

    Quote:

    If we started editing out responses as you suggested, it wouldn't be right. For example, imagine how you would feel if I edited out your entire post and replaced it with, "Removed because I disagree with a lot of what he says - Shiva."


    You do not seem to have understood me, which puzzles me because I explained particularly this in great detail. Allow me to quote myself here:

    Quoted from DeathAndPain:

    For that reason, it is important that any technical moderator is humble enough to leave any opinion uncommented as long as it is not obvious nonsense. Perhaps he should use a different account when participating in a discussion, so that his personal statements (which reflect but his opinion) are clearly separated from his official moderator statements (which should be pretty much above discussion, as they only state the obvious from the standpoint of any good player).

    As Jet_Set_Jim already suggested, moderator intervention should only apply (and only be allowed) on obvious facts, facts that pretty much every 1700+ player would agree about. Jet_Set_Jim also gave demonstrative examples what this could be: "lol - the best way to r0xx0rz Loki is to use cav & myth. btw I am 19++ (honest but if you ask 4 an ESO nick I'll mumble and then vanish)"

    So the plan is not to have extra-smart moderators censor strategical discussion. The plan is to have skilled but humble moderators remove the obvious bs that newbies are told by other newbies that overestimate their knowledge by far. That can also include plainly wrong information (such as claiming that turmae are cavalry and suffer double damage from crennelation towers).

    Quoted from Shiva:

    I don't think that it is. A moderator's job is to keep the forumers from following the Code of Conduct as closely as possible. Our replying to technical questions about this game is not as crucial as the aforementioned, but highly suggested.


    That is the definition of a regular moderator. Jet_Set_Jim suggested to introduce a new type of moderators with a different task. This new type would not replace the regular moderators. It would complement them.

    Quoted from Shiva:

    The Seraphs often have been known to choose Moderators based on their conduct in the forumers.


    That requirement would go for the technical moderators (or whatever you call them; I will stick with this term for ease of understanding) as well. It is what I called "humbleness".

    Quoted from Shiva:

    As for the the errors in our own website, I lead you to the "Website Comments" Forum. E-mailing Angel GloryOfSparta with any relevant information would be the fastest way to rectify any such faults.


    That is your current way of dealing with those bugs. And as time as shown, it does not work. Otherwise, those bugs would have been corrected in all those years.

    The main problem that I see, Shiva, is that you ("you" not meaning you personally, but the entire AoMH crew, or at least their leaders) do not seem to be willing to actually take action. You are confronted by a problem, and your only reaction is: "We will try to have a closer eye on that in the future, but not really change anything." You even go as far as talking about AoMH in the past and promising better support for future heavens, indicating that there will be no plans on improving AoMH any further.

    There is another AoM page that used to follow this approach. It is known as MFO and once was the dominating AoM page that everyone talked about and everyone went to. However, a new competitor arised, known as AoMH, and the guys at MFO ignored this new competition. Since AoMH offered better structure and features than MFO, it soon became the primary AoM page, and all the players flocked over to AoMH. Today few ppl even mention MFO anymore.

    Meanwhile, however, another competitor has emerged, known as AOTS. They offer great new features, such as an excellent replay database and an "Ask the experts" forum. This has already caused the elite players to defect AoMH for AOTS, and lots of other players are following. AoMH is still a very-well known site, and does have the chance to counter and offer interesting features that AOTS does not have. However, you are currently making the same mistake that MFO used to make: Based on the fact that you are still well-known, you do not think you need to take action and revamp your structures. It does not take a genius to figure out where this will lead. Sooner or later the battle will be lost for good, and AoMH will be vanished into unimportance. Then again, what you said indicates that AoMH has already been abandoned from high orbit, and all development efforts go into future heavens for future games...

    Kumar Shah
    Mortal
    posted 29 March 2005 03:33 AM EDT (US)     14 / 35       

    With moderators, a big problem lies in first finding suitable people to be trusted with that activity. Second, its almost impossible for any moderator to keep track of all posts made at a forum as active as AoMH. Most of the times, when we close posts or edit them out you will notice we try to give a suggestion/opinion on how to post. We can't still stop people from posting what they beleive is right, what they think is good. We can't make a rule saying newbies can't advice newbies, or newbies can't reply to help posts. We do try to keep it as good as possible. Also, giving mods the ability to delete posts turns out to be dangerous at times.

    As for experts and newbies and stuff, HG has generally catered to the lower skilled ranks of the gaming community. Mainly the reason for that is people tend to get help here. We are trying to change and attract the other crowd too, but thats a process still in works.

    Also, you are thinking we are abandoning AoMH, but that is clearly not the case. We are trying our best to perform our jobs in the best possible way. Remember, even AoEH right now is still being supported by HG.

    For website errors, as Shiva said I will repeat that you are welcome to direct them to the Website Comments and Suggestions forum, and beleive me thats the best way to do so. I assure you that AoMH staff will try its best to remove and correct the errors.


    Can you do the Double Yoda?
    A sexual move, where you do a double backflip, insert your penis into the orifice of choice, and scream, "Afraid are you?"
    Pwned
    Mortal
    (id: You_Are_Pwned)
    posted 29 March 2005 04:26 AM EDT (US)     15 / 35       
    My main concern would be that the news isn't being updated enough, GP posted news a few weeks ago of the next GGL season on the forums but it didn't get put on the main page.

    ada
    sdw12umdjc
    Mortal
    posted 29 March 2005 11:11 AM EDT (US)     16 / 35       
    As a newer player I have found it somewhat annoying when people give advice that really isn't that great. It is sometimes easy to tell the good advice from the bad, but other times not. A lot of times the experienced players can get annoyed with all the newbie posts and questions, that's just normal. I think it would help if was a short post about posting questions with how to do so in order to get your question answered well. For example, it isn't smart to ask, "How do I stop a Loki rush?" without saying which god you are playing with and what kind of experience you have playing, etc... This kind of thing if often left out of newbie posts. As a newer player it is nice to see that the experienced players are willing to help out the new. For the new players, read the manual. A lot of your questions could be answered by doing so.
    SirGrayhorn
    Mortal
    posted 29 March 2005 12:10 PM EDT (US)     17 / 35       
    this is simply another attempt at the "elite players" trying to abuse the "noob players"

    its an open forum, open for discussion. if someone post bad information to a begginers question, then simply state that person was wrong and give your reason why. its that simple.

    if, because your 17++ you consider yourself better suited to give advice, which is true, fine, jump into the thread, throw your leet rating out there, and give your godly adivce. if the new player reads it and takes the information to better their game then fine, you made a difference, if not then hope eventually they will learn.

    to turn a little issue into something as far as editing out bad information is ludacris. their is no need to use up MOD time just so the "elite players" could shut the "noob players" up. thats all it really is.

    person gives wrong advice. fine. just post your right advice. move on.


    But just as the smoke cleared, a red cloak of silk burnt and battle worn blew past the fire, and from the buring embers of the catapault Sir Grayhorn emerged, Jalmal's Bain still strongly grasped in his right hand and his kite shield lined with steel pierced with arrows held high in his left. The hero had endured.
    Etendorf
    Mortal
    posted 29 March 2005 03:02 PM EDT (US)     18 / 35       
    Recs=proof of viability of advice, strats, stuff and other stuff.

    AOMH isn't quite well known for it's recs...

    that's what I think.


    Nick: Eten.
    Gods: All of them!
    Vanilla.
    Brtnboarder495
    Mortal
    posted 29 March 2005 05:47 PM EDT (US)     19 / 35       
    Agreed. But its a community, so you cant exclude anyone.

    Gameranger: _NiGhThAwK_
    DeathAndPain
    Mortal
    posted 30 March 2005 04:04 AM EDT (US)     20 / 35       

    Quoted from Kumar Shah:

    With moderators, a big problem lies in first finding suitable people to be trusted with that activity.


    I agree. This is a difficult task that must be mastered. Then again, it can be mastered, especially with such a (still) large community as the one that you have to select from. As you can see above, the community already suggested someone.

    Quoted from Kumar Shah:

    Second, its almost impossible for any moderator to keep track of all posts made at a forum as active as AoMH.


    For any single moderator, yes. For that reason, it is a good idea to have multiple ones of every "type". This of course requires the problem that you named to be solved.

    It would also be no catastrophe if a few noob responses passed through undetected, as long as the majority is dealt with appropiately.

    Quoted from Kumar Shah:

    We can't make a rule saying newbies can't advice newbies, or newbies can't reply to help posts.


    You can, if you want to. But the suggested approach was a different one: Clearly mark false information as false, so that anyone sees that it is false, and nobody is being misled any further. This way you are not censoring out people, you are censoring out wrong information. And you are only touching information that is unarguably wrong.

    As mentioned before, this will also have the educating side effect that ppl will double-check the validity of their wisdom before spreading it, because nobody likes his statements to be officially declared "wrong information" (a matter of - deserved - reputation).

    Quoted from Kumar Shah:

    Also, giving mods the ability to delete posts turns out to be dangerous at times.


    You are right; uncommented deletion is dangerous. Still I consider it important to remove the false information from a thread, so that subsequent responders discuss the actual thread topic and not the wrong reply. This is the only way to keep a thread free from off-topic clutter; greatly increasing the original poster's chances to actually get a valid response to his question. That is why I suggest not simply deleting false responses, but replace their content with a remark that this information was removed because it was incorrect. This will keep the course of the thread transparent, while removing the incorrect info from the discussion. And again, I agree that such intervention must be done with great caution and humbleness, and requires carefully selected "technical moderators" (or whatever pleases you to call them).

    Here is a suggestion, Kumar Shah: Let the community decide if they want this by installing a new forum with the title "Strategical Questions forum with quality-assuring censorship". That title is clear enough so that nobody can complain about corresponding actions taken with threads inside it. If ppl will not use it, but stick to the regular strategy forum instead, then I am wrong. However, I am confident that a newbie that is seeking a suitable forum for posing his question will choose this forum over the regular strategy forum, because the title clearly indicates he is less likely to get trash responses there. Let the two forums compete and find out which one is more popular in the long run. This would already mean taking the initiative and trying something new and interesting rather than watching AoMH continuously losing ground to AOTS with the "We will try to do better in the future, but are not prepared to change anything." stance.

    Quoted from Kumah Shah:

    As for experts and newbies and stuff, HG has generally catered to the lower skilled ranks of the gaming community. Mainly the reason for that is people tend to get help here.


    That is easily proven wrong by the successful "Ask the experts"-forum at AOTS. Many experts are very helpful. And even on AoMH, elite players like KS_Josey_Wales and Hope offered a lot of help. That was back when AoMH still had elite players...

    The problem is that experts are often not willing to discuss tons of preceding noob responses from ppl that have no idea what they are talking about. That is why question-threads must be kept free of clutter as good as possible.

    The second thing is that the "lower skilled ranks of the gaming community", as you put it, often just do not have the ability to help. Good will alone is not sufficient. To put it mathematically, effective help is the product of good will and actual playing skill (with language skill, i.e. the ability to explain something understandably, being a third factor).

    Quoted from Kumar Shah:

    Also, you are thinking we are abandoning AoMH


    I just interpreted what Shiva said. He sounded as if the really innovative features were reserved for future heavens.

    Quoted from Kumar Shah:

    For website errors, as Shiva said I will repeat that you are welcome to direct them to the Website Comments and Suggestions forum, and beleive me thats the best way to do so.


    Without intending the faintest offense, please allow me a comparison. What Shiva and you say sounds like the complaint of a salesman: "It is not my fault that I do not sell enough goods. It is the fault of the customers who do not buy enough from me!"

    As time has proven, the public does not accept your way of reporting bugs (otherwise your tables would have become perfect long ago). There is no point in blaming the public for the remaining bugs in your tables. But you do, because you effectively state: "If someone reported the bugs the way we defined, then we would fix them asap, but nobody does, so they are still there."

    Instead of assuming such a stance, it would be better to think of reasons why you do not get the information you need to update the tables. I think we both agree that the information is out there, and that you do have a helpful community that can and will provide it if you find a more appropiate way to ask them for it. Your tables are very important for AoMH, because they are something that every halfway-good player needs and that he can not get at AOTS.

    Most strategy-interested ppl regularly visit the strategy forum, and many only visit that forum (often using a direct bookmark that leads there). For that reason, it makes little sense to ask for the information you need elsewhere. Sticky threads have proven very popular and effective when it comes to gathering information. So from my point of view, the most obvious way to find all remaining bugs in your tables and get precise information in no time would be to create a sticky thread in the strategy forum, a thread in which you ask for AoMH unit table bugs. The AoMH admin that is in charge of the tables would just have to check that thread regularly, and I am positive that the bugs would be fixed more than quickly.

    Reaction just will not do. It is action that you have to take if you want to save AoMH from vanishing in the shadow of AOTS just like the AoM section of MFO vanished in the shadow of AoMH.

    Quoted from SirGrayhorn:

    person gives wrong advice. fine. just post your right advice.


    Trouble is that many ppl - including experts that could provide a good answer - will often not bother to read a question thread if it already has a number of responses, because they will assume the question is already answered, and they do not plan on wading through all those responses. That is why question threads must be kept free of clutter.

    Quoted from Brtnboarder495:

    But its a community, so you cant exclude anyone.


    Yes. Who suggested doing so?
    Sunshine
    Banned
    posted 30 March 2005 05:48 AM EDT (US)     21 / 35       
    Hmmm... let me state that I no longer represent AoMH, though I was a staff member here from early 2003 to late 2004. In this respect, two staff members have replaced my previous positions; therefore I can not be certain as to what changes they have made since then.

    I do agree that AoMH is distinctly different in the AoM community, and that at times questions can be falsely answered. It has been a concern that prior "Age of" websites at HG continue to retain, yet there are intentions to attempt to assist in changing that - even if it can only be done minimally.

    Quote:

    4) The mods do a great job here, and I know that they are kept absurdly busy by flamers and gibberish posters... But is there perhaps room for a "Technical" moderator on the General and Strategy forums? By this I mean someone who most would recognise as a trustworthy exponent of the game (such as Pug or, prior to his leaving, Johnny_Deppig) - who would correct the more glaringly wrong and bad technical advice that regulary crops up?

    One main problem, which may have already been stated, is that it is difficult determining forumers who would intend to stay and moderate at HG. The average time that most forumers remain at HG, or any community in fact, is less than a year - even only a few months. In this case, it takes time to determine who may stay and who wont.

    Secondly, while it is not always true, those who you could consider great advice personnel have in the past turned down the offer of a job. The ones who refuse tend to not desire to have a commitment at a gaming community. They would much rather help rookies and play the game than assist in the moderation. It is understandable, however.

    It is not difficult to gain notoriety as a technical help forumer without being a moderator. Already there are cases where a few forumers have acted as technical help forumers, even to the point where they become known for that, yet it would seem that they are not always around for every thread which needs to be corrected.

    Quote:

    For that reason, I would propose that a good technical moderator should not add a comment, but edit the trash response and replace it with a standard statement like "This response has been deleted by a technical moderator because it contained false information." He could also pm the author of the trash response with a short remark why he deleted the response, but this explanation should not be placed into the thread because it has nothing to do with the actual topic (as defined by nothing but the initial thread starter text)

    There comes a point when the fine line of moderation is met. I do not mean to disregard your suggestion, but in recent years HG has become far more lenient than it was before. You run the risk of opening up problems if a moderator edits a thread because it contains a forumer's opinion which is not considered to be correct.

    While the idea of a technical moderator is intriguing, there are other ways to assist forumers in ensuring that correct answers are given to questions asked by newcomers to AoMH. Perhaps the one way which has worked is to set by example. If there were more forumers who, as yourself and others, who would emulate your system of posting and answering questions, the standard of posting in the forum would increase. I do not advocate lax moderation, but gamers prefer to look up to others, not get cut down for stating something which they may believe is correct.

    Quote:

    Another approach to make AoMH more attractive for good players is having absolutely correct tables on all unit data here. Right now, the unit tables on AoMH are already the best you can find on the net (as far as I know), yet there are still bugs in there, bugs that have partially been there from the very beginning and never been fixed. A good example is the missing 2x damage bonus that RC get against siege units. Another is the actual damage of certain myth units that differs from what they should have in theory (e.g. fire giants).

    Some unit statistics have also changed along with the introduction of the Titans expansion. An example is the ulfsark and the TA having the same hack armor, which was not the case in vanilla AoM. It would be good if the tables would somehow reflect this.

    In the case of AoMH, the way the tables and unit statistics are set up is by hand - unlike the system at RoNH and other recent Heavens, of which are automated from a database. Human error can effect the shape of the tables, but overall, the tables are in a better state than what they may have ended up being had there been no focus on them originally.

    While in prior years I did have jurisdiction over the tables, I am unsure of the changes made by the people who have been in that position since I resigned. GloryofSparta will most likely do a good job of fixing the minor bugs which remain.

    Quote:

    How can that precise data be acquired? Quite easily, actually. Nobody can test everything, but some player knows one fragment, the next one another. An easy approach would be to create a sticky thread in which ppl can post AoM table bugs. If these bugs are quickly fixed as ppl post them, AoM Heaven would have bug-free tables in no time, a highly interesting feature that AOTS cannot offer.

    In recent years, the information for the tables is provided by the patch information and official documents given to the community from ES. I do consider your suggestion beneficial, though.

    Quote:

    "did"... you are using the simple past, which indicates something that has been finished. So AoMH has been abandoned and will not receive further development? Just like ES has abandoned AoM and will not even fix the most blatant bugs (Healing Spring deconstruction) any more?

    AoMH will continue to expand, as other prior "Age of" Heavens (AoKH and AoEH) have, yet it wont be substantial development.

    Quote:

    There is another AoM page that used to follow this approach. It is known as MFO and once was the dominating AoM page that everyone talked about and everyone went to. However, a new competitor arised, known as AoMH, and the guys at MFO ignored this new competition. Since AoMH offered better structure and features than MFO, it soon became the primary AoM page, and all the players flocked over to AoMH. Today few ppl even mention MFO anymore.

    Meanwhile, however, another competitor has emerged, known as AOTS. They offer great new features, such as an excellent replay database and an "Ask the experts" forum. This has already caused the elite players to defect AoMH for AOTS, and lots of other players are following. AoMH is still a very-well known site, and does have the chance to counter and offer interesting features that AOTS does not have. However, you are currently making the same mistake that MFO used to make: Based on the fact that you are still well-known, you do not think you need to take action and revamp your structures. It does not take a genius to figure out where this will lead. Sooner or later the battle will be lost for good, and AoMH will be vanished into unimportance. Then again, what you said indicates that AoMH has already been abandoned from high orbit, and all development efforts go into future heavens for future games...

    Unless HeavenGames dies, AoMH wont completely die. It has been one of HG's best sites for the past 3 years. Ever since the creation of AoEH, HG has always had health competition. Healthy competition is what helps spur some form of progress. I recall at a time that AoEH's largest 'competitors' were a now defunct site called Telcontar's and Planet Age of Empires. For AoKH, the main 'competitors' were a now defunct site, The AoK Battlefield, and MFO. Although MFO was known as a key area for experts, there were still experts in AoKH. AoKH still remains, and continues to retain a great deal of respect in the AoK community.

    In the case of AoMH, it has gone through a number of healthy 'competitors.' You have PAoM, MFO, Brow's, Ogre's, and now AoTS. In many ways, each site had contributed or contributes something to the AoM community. Instead of competitors, each site works, in some ways, as a supplement for one another. Even though MFO no longer contains its strong expert community, AoMH has for a while acted as the area to which new players to the game tend to come to. No doubt it would be nice to have more experts at AoMH, but as long as there are new players to AoM, AoMH will be here.

    For the longest time, it has been the intention to encourage more experts to post here. Through clinics, it has been somewhat successful - no doubt that the current administration has plans for it, as well - However, to go along with your original idea, it should be a focus of everyone to assist and improve the knowledge and skill of the new players. Eventually, they may become experts and move onto AoTS or another AoM site, yet it shows that AoMH in that way is important, perhaps.

    Quote:

    It would also be no catastrophe if a few noob responses passed through undetected, as long as the majority is dealt with appropiately.

    Would it not work better to correct 'noob responses,' later on in the thread, instead of the direct approach of censoring it (as has been described earlier in this thread)? In this way, you would be informing both the person asking the question and the noob as to what the 'correct' response should be.

    Quote:

    As time has proven, the public does not accept your way of reporting bugs (otherwise your tables would have become perfect long ago). There is no point in blaming the public for the remaining bugs in your tables. But you do, because you effectively state: "If someone reported the bugs the way we defined, then we would fix them asap, but nobody does, so they are still there."

    There is no intention to blame the public for such errors; however, in addition to your idea, e-mailing the person in charge of that area can be effective. The person in charge of that area will check their e-mails.

    Quote:

    Reaction just will not do. It is action that you have to take if you want to save AoMH from vanishing in the shadow of AOTS just like the AoM section of MFO vanished in the shadow of AoMH.

    The AoM section of MFO did not vanish due to the actions of AoMH. Likewise, AoMH wont vanish because of AoTS. If anything, the AoM fansites work in union with one another. Sure, as I mentioned above, there is 'healthy competition,' but each site is important for a reason, otherwise they would not be as active as they presently seem to be.

    Quote:

    Trouble is that many ppl - including experts that could provide a good answer - will often not bother to read a question thread if it already has a number of responses, because they will assume the question is already answered, and they do not plan on wading through all those responses. That is why question threads must be kept free of clutter.

    I don't quite see the logic in this. While I can understand the inhibitions of a few players on this issue, it is not difficult to enter a thread which asks a question you have knowledge about, and answer it. Even if the thread has 100 replies, if a player know about the topic, why would he/she not answer the question from their own perspective (which may equally be the 'truth' as far as misleading information can be)?


    [This message has been edited by Angel Sunny (edited 03-30-2005 @ 05:56 AM).]

    DeathAndPain
    Mortal
    posted 30 March 2005 08:37 AM EDT (US)     22 / 35       

    Quoted from Sunny:

    One main problem, which may have already been stated, is that it is difficult determining forumers who would intend to stay and moderate at HG.


    That is correct. But you can learn from history: A forummer that has been active for many months is not likely to vanish quickly. And his activity during these months also allows for evaluation of his personality, behavior, and game knowledge.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    You run the risk of opening up problems if a moderator edits a thread because it contains a forumer's opinion which is not considered to be correct.


    ...which is why it may only be done if the incorrectness of that "opinion" (I would rather call it "statement") is not arguable in the eyes of any good player.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    Secondly, while it is not always true, those who you could consider great advice personnel have in the past turned down the offer of a job. The ones who refuse tend to not desire to have a commitment at a gaming community. They would much rather help rookies and play the game than assist in the moderation. It is understandable, however.


    I believe that you experienced this when looking for new "standard" moderators. However, "technical moderators" in the sense of this thread would mean less administrative work, but actually helping rookies instead, because they wipe out the false information that misleads the rookies. And playing the game, well, anybody who comes here is not playing the game while doing so, whether he posts here as regular member, or as a moderator.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    It is not difficult to gain notoriety as a technical help forumer without being a moderator.


    But the noobs do not know who is notorious for the quality of his responses. If they did, they would have frequented this forum often and most likely no longer be noobs. So they do not know who is telling the truth and who is not. An official technical moderator can make this clear.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    If there were more forumers who, as yourself and others, who would emulate your system of posting and answering questions, the standard of posting in the forum would increase.


    But if you do not educate ppl into this direction, then it will never happen. On the other hand, a forum with (enforcedly) higher content quality could easily attract expert players that are tired of dealing with 90% trash suggestions. Especially since AOTS has just the same problems in their forums. That is why I suggest trying the new strategy forum with quality-assuring censorship and watching how the public reacts. If ppl do not accept it, you can always shut it down and have lost nothing. But if they do accept it, you have something to offer that the competition does not.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    I do not advocate lax moderation, but gamers prefer to look up to others, not get cut down for stating something which they may believe is correct.


    But they sure do not like to wade through tons of obvious (i.e. not really arguable) crap either when browsing the forums for interesting discussions.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    In the case of AoMH, the way the tables and unit statistics are set up is by hand - unlike the system at RoNH and other recent Heavens, of which are automated from a database. Human error can effect the shape of the tables, but overall, the tables are in a better state than what it may have ended up being had there been no focus on them originally.


    There is nothing wrong with that - but still, AoMH is not a private hobby site; it is a professional gaming web site. For that reason, it should be a priority to find mistakes and correct them (even if that correction is done manually) rather than having them reside in your tables untouched for years.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    In recent years, the information for the tables is provided by the patch information and official documents given to the community from ES.


    Nothing personal, but that could be an official ES statement (and while I love the game, I hate ES). You are aware that relying on official ES information and documentation is just as reliable as planning your strategy based on the in-game help texts, aren't you? (And the in-game help texts more than suck from the strategic point of view, even if the historical info is nice to read.)

    Quoted from Sunny:

    There is no intention to blame the public for such errors; however, in addition to your idea, e-mailing the person in charge of that area can be effective. The person in charge of that area will check their e-mails.


    Yes. And if no emails come, nothing will be corrected. That is what I meant with my salesman analogy. And that is what I meant when I said that action, not reaction, is necessary in order to achieve a change.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    Unless HeavenGames dies, AoMH wont completely die.


    Well, does it satisfy you to know that AoMH will not "completely" die, only mostly? Because of a competitor that you had a real chance against, yet against which you took no action? I mean, "dying" is a matter of definition. The AoM section of MFO is not dead either, because it is still online, but that makes little difference, because nobody goes there anymore.

    And my impression is that you underestimate the situation. 100% of the elite players that I know are exclusively at AOTS now (even if you may be able to name one or two that still show up here now and then). The elite players are the role models for the majority of the other players, so most of these have gone there as well. The replay database certainly is a feature that is hard to compete against. But what exactly does AoMH have right now that AOTS cannot offer as well? The tables, yes. That is a big one for you, although the replay database weighes more. But aside from that? A few events? That will not do. You feel safe because you still have a lot of life in your forums. But that only means you still have a chance. If you follow the MFO example and just wait until your forums are dead, then you are out of the AoM business for good.

    I do not know much about AoE and AoK and possible competition in that area. But the Heavens have set high standards, so I have no problem believing that no other site could beat you there. The only reason that AOTS can is that their replay database and corresponding excellent interface is an awesome feature. But they do have it.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    In the case of AoMH, it has gone through a number of healthy 'competitors.' You have PAoM, MFO, Brow's, Ogre's, and now AoTS

    .
    PAoM never impressed me. They never had anything that you could not offer as well. I never heard about Brow's and Ogre's, so I assume they belonged to the numerous AoM fan sites that never reached real importance. Only MFO did, but lost it to you, because your web site structure and design was superior.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    Would it not work better to correct 'noob responses,' later on in the thread, instead of the direct approach of censoring it (as has been described earlier in this thread)? In this way, you would be informing both the person asking the question and the noob as to what the 'correct' response should be.


    In theory, yes. But look into your forums (and that goes for AOTS forums as well, with the exception of the Ask the Experts forum, however) and see reality. You start a thread and ask a question. If you are lucky, you get a satisfying answer quickly (the more complicated your question, or the higher the skill level of it, the more luck you need). In most cases, however, the thread will end up like this:

    A - poses initial question

    B - gives a self-assertive advice which is actually a noobish trash response which will doom A's troops if he follows it

    C - explains the consequences that will arise if A follows B's suggestion Note that we are already on the level where a useless approach is being discussed, instead of the original question that the thread should be about

    D - flames B for writing crap, not offendingly enough for a moderator to intervene, but with no useful content either

    B - defends his approach and emphasizes certain aspects of it

    E - suggests that A should do more raiding (suggesting to raid is sometimes used as a joker response, even if it has nothing to do with the original question)

    F - suggests an approach that A has already discussed in his initial question text, because F did not bother even to read the original text completely before answering to it

    Now a skilled player that is prepared to help newbies browses the strategy forum for new questions and sees this one in the forum index. However, because this question already has 6 "replies", he assumes that this question is already answered and skips it.

    This is how lots of questions that I asked in the strategy forum over years ended up. The more "replies" the forum index lists, the less likely you are to get a real answer (but the more likely those that you do get are to be a repetition of previous answers because ppl do not real all through the thread before replying).

    That is why question threads must be kept clean of clutter, and why discussion in such a thread must be prevented from detouring into something different from what the author wanted to know (at least until his question has got a qualified response). Holding up the "freedom of speech for everyone"-flag is absolutely not helpful in this context, as noble as it may sound at first glance.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    Likewise, AoMH wont vanish because of AoTS

    Not vanish perhaps, just become unimportant because no important player in the AoM scene bothers ever to go there anymore.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    While I can understand the inhibitions of a few players on this issue, it is not difficult to enter a thread which asks a question you have knowledge about, and answer it. Even if the thread has 100 replies, if a player know about the topic, why would he/she not answer the question from their own perspective (which may equally be the 'truth' as far as misleading information can be)?


    Because in reality ppl will not do it. Aside from the fact that your approach would lead to dozens of duplicate responses, nobody desires to invest work and answer a question that has obviously been answered before. And having many "responses" is regarded as an indication that the question of the thread has been answered. In order to find out that it is not, the player would have to open the thread and read all through the useless preceding replies. From a certain number of replies upwards, ppl are not prepared to do that. That is what happens in actual threads.

    I mean, your ideas are nice and sound convincing, Sunny, but what does that help if they do not work in real forums? (Marx' communism is also a great thing in theory, only that it does not work with real humans.)

    Jet_Set_Jim
    Mortal
    posted 31 March 2005 10:44 AM EDT (US)     23 / 35       
    Wow. Nice to see this thread revived.

    Quoted from Sunny:

    AoMH will continue to expand, as other prior "Age of" Heavens (AoKH and AoEH) have, yet it wont be substantial development.

    Is AoMH expanding? Sadly, I get the impression that it's diminishing in terms of quality and traffic. Mind you, I do accept that part of this is due to the 'life-cycle' of AoM rather than the efforts of the staff here.

    I am sure that a lot of the concepts and thinking here will be considered for future HG forums.

    Sunshine
    Banned
    posted 04 April 2005 04:02 AM EDT (US)     24 / 35       
    AoMH will most likely not be able to make as radical changes as proposed with the idea of "Technical" moderators at the present time, however, it may be possible to set up an experimental group of some kind.

    HeavenGames OD has a select group of forumers known as the "Core Group," who share some characteristics with this plan, except they deal primarily in off-topic posts, and not with gaming. It seems to have worked well, even to the point where the group is beginning to mature and grow to some extent.

    Perhaps under similar circumstances it could work here?

    DeathAndPain
    Mortal
    posted 04 April 2005 08:15 AM EDT (US)     25 / 35       
    Exactly what do you mean with "similar circumstances"?
    Sunshine
    Banned
    posted 04 April 2005 02:45 PM EDT (US)     26 / 35       

    Quote:

    Exactly what do you mean with "similar circumstances"?

    A system loosely based on the "OD Core Group," but with a different purpose and explicitly focused on gaming (in this case AoM).

    DeathAndPain
    Mortal
    posted 05 April 2005 04:41 AM EDT (US)     27 / 35       
    Sounds nice. When will you set it up?
    Shiva
    HG Alumnus
    posted 05 April 2005 08:39 AM EDT (US)     28 / 35       

    Quote:

    A system loosely based on the "OD Core Group," but with a different purpose and explicitly focused on gaming (in this case AoM).

    Sunny, go here to see where I've suggested the same.


    .¸¸.· · .¸¸.·´ §hïvå | RágeOfHaemòn · .¸¸.· · .¸¸.·
    « . ° ¤ Scenario Designer | Woad Creations ¤ º . »
    Tordenskiold
    Mortal
    posted 06 April 2005 03:34 PM EDT (US)     29 / 35       
    Some really good points being made here, and I totally agrees with Jet_set_jim and DeathandPain.

    The problem with bad players giving advise mainly is, that they are not willing to accept when somebody proves them wrong. The topics often turn into flame wars and the poor newbie that started out asking the question ends up more confused at the end than he was when he asked the question.

    Quoted from Kumar Shah:


    Also, you are thinking we are abandoning AoMH

    Difficult to think otherwise when you don't even bother to change that stupid Xmas logo (we have the month of April for your kind information ). How hard can it be if you really cared about the forum ??



    TORDENSKIOLD(1690-1720)

    During the Great Nordic War (1700-1720), he was commander of the danish navy, which defeaded the swedish army at Kristiania (modern Oslo). After the war, he was killed in a duel on Nov. 12, 1720 just outside Hamburg, Germany, during a travel to England.

    ESO: TORDENSKIOLD

    [This message has been edited by Tordenskiold (edited 04-06-2005 @ 03:34 PM).]

    SilverOsirisAOM
    Mortal
    posted 07 April 2005 06:06 PM EDT (US)     30 / 35       
    ^ LOL good point that cracked me up when I went on here for the first time since the holidays and saw it was still there.

    I told you I'd be back.
    « Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
    You must be logged in to post messages.
    Please login or register

    Hop to:    

    Age of Mythology Heaven | HeavenGames