Proposal about voting for plausible changes

For Bard's Tale IV gameplay-related discussion. May include gameplay details and spoilers.

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers

User avatar
Jademonk
Initiate
Posts: 24
Joined: May 19th, 2017, 5:59 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by Jademonk » April 13th, 2018, 4:11 pm

I definitely want to vote in favor of old-school multiple character creation, so put that on the ballot.

demeisen
Explorer
Posts: 259
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by demeisen » April 14th, 2018, 8:21 am

Jademonk wrote:
April 13th, 2018, 4:11 pm
I definitely want to vote in favor of old-school multiple character creation, so put that on the ballot.
Yep, got it ("No 'main' PC. Game start should allow creation of multiple PCs")

I'll post a voting thread probably in a day or two. Since there's no in-forum voting ability, I want to modify the vote tally script so that I can post instructions in that thread without the instructions themselves being counted as votes (or precluding my own ability to vote). It won't take long to make that change, I just have to get off my butt and do it.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3380
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by Gizmo » April 14th, 2018, 5:25 pm

While more labor intensive, I do think that it would be a better idea (, and give more concise results) if the members each posted in a common thread, their own personal for & against lists (with optional reasons), and have an end date announced before locking the thread for tabulation... And tabulation in this case would mean that one or more volunteer members assigned, will read all or part of the thread, and sort like minded suggestions into groups. Then each of these completed groups should be distilled (re-written) into a common suggestion that best imparts the combined concerns and intentions of each poster in the group.

As it is, I find that I must vote +/- for options that might only cursorily resemble what I want out of them... and ones that could easily be implemented in a way that doesn't address the reasons why I voted for them.

demeisen
Explorer
Posts: 259
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by demeisen » April 16th, 2018, 10:23 am

(moving this over from the voting thread):
Does this auto-parse take the first fifteen prefixed lines that it finds? (Will it ignore member comments, both before and after the list found in each post—and ignore posts with no lists?)
Yes. As it stands, the script looks for lines starting with whitespace plus one of "-" or "+" followed by text matching one of the vote items. It should ignore random text, but the more of that there is, the more the chance of accidental troubles. For instance, it isn't smart about quoting, so if you just quote someone else's votes, and that's the first thing you do in the thread, it'll take the quoted votes as your votes too.
*I didn't post before, because (expecting automation)... It said not to post twice. (Feel free to delete this post if this is necessarily the case.)
The script will count votes in your first post, and ignore subsequent posts by the same author, so that shouldn't hurt anything. But it's a very simpleminded script, so the less we confuse it, the better :D.

I also agree with someone's take (Drool?) that some of the items are not well phrased to be vote items. But it's hard to change them now that people have posted votes already. It's certainly an imperfect thing, sorry...

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1362
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by thebruce » April 16th, 2018, 10:33 am

demeisen wrote:
April 16th, 2018, 10:23 am
Yes. As it stands, the script looks for lines starting with whitespace plus one of "-" or "+" followed by text matching one of the vote items. It should ignore random text, but the more of that there is, the more the chance of accidental troubles. For instance, it isn't smart about quoting, so if you just quote someone else's votes, and that's the first thing you do in the thread, it'll take the quoted votes as your votes too.
Yeah so I was smart in my comment by putting them in () to avoid them being counted (in and out of quote) :)
The script will count votes in your first post, and ignore subsequent posts by the same author, so that shouldn't hurt anything.
Cool, instead of making a new post I edited the first one to add my votes...
Script: 0, Me: 2 :)
I also agree with someone's take (Drool?) that some of the items are not well phrased to be vote items. But it's hard to change them now that people have posted votes already. It's certainly an imperfect thing, sorry...
Don't apologize, it's better than what we have otherwise (nothing) and it certainly helps to form ideas and thoughts about certain topics for discussion elsewhere. Even if those who reply are only a very very thin cross-section of the whole community. (and it was I pointing out the double negative :) - the difference between "(happy/sad about) subject" and "(do or do not) specific thing" hehe)
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3380
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by Gizmo » April 16th, 2018, 10:40 am

If the vote suggestions were identified by label, or a choice number, instead of verbatim content, then the actual text would be open to minor edits—so long as it didn't change the meaning. Alternatively, new suggestions could be added that reflect those edits (instead of changing the originals)... and have the script count the presence of either as only one vote. (The new/edited line could state its own equivalence to the other.)

Code: Select all

How about requiring all future votes to be in an un-quoted code block? That should isolate them fairly well.
A moderator could edit the previous page to correct existing posts.
The script need only check posts for code blocks initially, and discard any that are in quote tags.

demeisen
Explorer
Posts: 259
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by demeisen » April 16th, 2018, 11:05 am

Gizmo wrote:
April 16th, 2018, 10:40 am
If the vote suggestions were identified by choice number instead of verbatim content, then the actual text would be open to minor edits—so long as it didn't change the meaning).
True - I actually considered that, but was afraid it would have its own set of difficulties, like people thinking they should start numbering their votes from 1, and thus end up with mismatches between how the vote was counted, and what the text they were voting for said. Or thinking the numbers were a measure of how much they liked that particular item, and changing them. Or putting them in the auto-number blocks from the forum software.

As it stands, there is a tiny bit of fuzzy matching: for example if someone adds words after an item on the same line, it'll still match to one of the item categories. But best not to rock that particular boat...

Edit: Aw man, if I'd been thinking about it, I should have tagged each item with a 4 letter code, BT1-spell style :twisted:. Then the codes could be matched. Ah well.
thebruce wrote:
April 16th, 2018, 10:33 am
Even if those who reply are only a very very thin cross-section of the whole community.
Yeah. I hope as long as it's considered with the appropriate caveats like that, it'll be useful. It isn't going to scientifically capture anything, but it might provide a few rough indications.

And also like Gizmo said somewhere above, it loses an awful lot of subtlety around any of the individual items. It's really coarse, at best.

User avatar
Lord of Riva
Adventurer
Posts: 914
Joined: October 14th, 2014, 10:18 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by Lord of Riva » April 16th, 2018, 11:39 pm

if there are any problems with my post for example i can change it.

That said, while i think approaching it with an automatic solution if its less than what 15 peeps anyway you could also just as easily use a table and manually write them in.

demeisen
Explorer
Posts: 259
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by demeisen » April 17th, 2018, 11:45 am

Lord of Riva wrote:
April 16th, 2018, 11:39 pm
That said, while i think approaching it with an automatic solution if its less than what 15 peeps anyway you could also just as easily use a table and manually write them in.
Yeah - if not many more people vote, the whole exercise of making a script might have been a little silly...

Anyway, I'll run the tally script at the end of next weekend.

User avatar
phimseto
Developer
Posts: 541
Joined: April 18th, 2012, 7:01 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by phimseto » April 17th, 2018, 2:09 pm

Demeisen, I'm going to be on vacation next week. If there's any chance you could get that to me on Friday, I can make sure it gets passed along before I leave.

demeisen
Explorer
Posts: 259
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by demeisen » April 17th, 2018, 4:16 pm

phimseto wrote:
April 17th, 2018, 2:09 pm
Demeisen, I'm going to be on vacation next week. If there's any chance you could get that to me on Friday, I can make sure it gets passed along before I leave.
OK. I can run the script whenever. I will edit the vote post to indicate a new capture date.

I suppose it can be run again in the future if we want, and there are more posts to the thread.

User avatar
phimseto
Developer
Posts: 541
Joined: April 18th, 2012, 7:01 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by phimseto » April 17th, 2018, 4:46 pm

Yeah, by all means keep working on it past Friday. I can reforward it upon my return.

User avatar
ZiN
Explorer
Posts: 499
Joined: January 27th, 2015, 7:57 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by ZiN » April 18th, 2018, 6:19 am

I doubt that it will change substantially until friday, so I took the liberty and did some preliminary results. The sooner it gets passed along, the better, and until friday we might even elaborate a bit. Here we go:

Number or voters: 10

The overwhelming majority (9 out of 10 voters) primarily want a reworked spell system. To put it bluntly: Scrap the idea of "choosing 3 spells and using them on weapons to master them". Make it like the classics, where the character can choose from a large, dynamic list.

Classic party creation is following closely behind, with 8/10 votes, so no "chosen one" main hero. Hopefully also a dynamic Adventurers Guild, where one can swap characters in and out of the party.

The majority (6/10) also want a long term SP pool. Spell points should regenerate over time, when outside dungeons. In the originals, it only regenerated by daylight (solar-powered mages), but I also have an idea: By night, when the some of the Seven Constellations, plus the Companion Star is visible, characters would gain different special bonuses, depending on the stars.

6/10 of the voters also would like to have DEX/CON/LUCK back, as per the classics, as opposed to one voter, who is against it for some reason.

Slightly behind at the 5/10 mark are the voters, who want character level, attributes and abilities play the major part of effectiveness, instead of items. Especially on monks, but I would also say mages, since their spells also count as abilities.
Also at 5/10 we have utility spells, like in the classics (PHDO, SOSI, APAR, LEVI, GILL, etc, etc.) and mass damaging spells, which hurt all "waves of monsters" (MAMA, Gotterdamurung).
Then we have random encounters, per character AP pools and, most importantly, more robust keyboard controls: I for one, would love an optional, classic spell input by the 4 letter codes.

Only 4 out of 10 voters give priority to bringing back death, as a result of being obliterated and curiously, 3 out of 10 actually think, that despite dying, characters should still receive experience points. All the temples and shrines might get out of business, just like Roscoe (that is, if #3 is ignored) plus the mighty BEDE, GRRO, HEAL and DIVA spells losing their primary use. Those moments, when the last surviving, poisoned and old archmage managed to get off a Divine Intervention were priceless.

Lastly, it's no surprise, that 9/10 are against any form of level-scaling. That should be quite obvious.

Of course these are only the prime issues, all the items on the list should be looked at. Then we can move on to the next list, with the non-priority issues, regarded as a matter of polish, such as the butt-ugly, clunky, console UI and more.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1362
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by thebruce » April 18th, 2018, 6:29 am

Perhaps you could post the full raw list with their wordings and vote counts. There may be some +/- confusion (as noted at least once in the thread) due to double negatives and whatnot :P

Items with a lack of votes would also be relevant to see (consider that all items should start with 1 vote, otherwise they wouldn't be on the list in the first place :))
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

demeisen
Explorer
Posts: 259
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: Proposal about voting for plausible changes

Post by demeisen » April 18th, 2018, 11:21 am

thebruce wrote:
April 18th, 2018, 6:29 am
There may be some +/- confusion (as noted at least once in the thread) due to double negatives and whatnot :P
Indeed. I suspect that in one case. I've been meaning to drop a PM to that member to ensure they voted in the direction they think they did. (Fine if so - just best to avoid a mistake if possible, especially with so few voters).
Items with a lack of votes would also be relevant to see (consider that all items should start with 1 vote, otherwise they wouldn't be on the list in the first place :))
The tally script will break the votes out in that way. It has 4 categories: positive score, zero score, negative score, and "quality of life" improvements.

I think some of the zero score items may still be worthwhile to consider, especially if the implementation effort is small. It doesn't necessarily mean they're bad ideas, just that they didn't bubble into anyone's top 10 (or despised 5). EDIT: There may not be any in this category. There could have been, if someone suggested an idea in the huge alpha thread, and I captured it, but nobody voted either for or against it. Or alternately, albeit unlikely, if it received equal up and down counts.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest