… because I see a possibility and it’d be foolish not to try find middle ground. That’s my jugdement though.
But before I begin, I will lay out the terms of this discussion:
Attempt on Weighed compromise on the subject of PvP multiplayer.
What is this discussion?
This discussion aims to find a wheighted compromise between the players who want pvp to become part of stonehearth and those who do not want that. It also attempts to bring all points on the table, by which I mean, facts, lines of reasoning, gameplay goals, how details affect said gameplay goals as well as the nuances of when said details still work to affect the game towards those goals in the ways we want. In short, this discussion will try to find out what is possible in this space, and do so in a civilized manner.
What do I mean by wheighted compromise? Glad you asked.
A normal compromise has both parties comming to the middle, soley because they have to compromise and because their views differ. A weighted compromise adds weight to the facts that are on the table. In short terms: if you’re asking the impossible, you don’t get what you want. If you ask something reasonable (and in line with good quality/the goals the discussion tries to achieve), you will get something more like what you want.
What does that mean in this case?:
In this case it means the following: We know that currently the dev’s don’t want pvp or anything like it, because it might destroy the cutesy, peace-y feel of the game. Now this is a reasonable argument, thus you have two options. The first is to agree, and the second is to come with an alternative that takes this into account. A weighted compromise tries to do that by requiring that a solution takes all reasonable arguments into account.
Code of conduct
- Adhere to forum rules, and common decency.
- Please keep emotions in your arguments and reasoning, not in how you conduct your arguments and reasoning.
- If anyone fails point 2, assume it was unintentional and discard the emotional tone of the message in favor of the literal message.
- Always try to be constructive to the discussion. If you sense bad quality, at least try to come with an alternative instead of just complaining.
- The dev’s have the last say. They’ve thought about this more than anyone else, have the long term development path in the back of their minds and also know the goals they want the game to meet. This discussion is meant to try find compromises, but if it doesn’t work out, we go back to the default conduct which is, well, that the dev’s have the last say. All of this is to prevent the discussion to go to the political sphere where one can expect policy wins if they have sufficient voice, and instead keep things focussed on the facts.
- This is not the place for discussions on how we conduct these kind of discussions, or how we conduct these discussions in general. If you feel you have constructive stuff to say about it, there is the ability to reference to this discussion thread in the meta-section of the forums. If you want to ask me questions about why the specific code of conduct items are what they are, that is also the place to go. (please keep it all in 1 thread though.)
Thanks in advance. .