@Cobalt said in MU Peeves Thread:
The overwhelming feeling that I am not welcome anywhere. (This is nothing anyone has done or said to me, this is my own brain being an asshole to me.)
This is why I am so slow to start RPing at any game I join and the primary reason I stop attending RL tabletop groups.
In my case, I think I’d prefer a very short pre-made list combined with a behavior filter. 99% of people get the filter, but there are a handful of people that would be on my pre-banned list, and if I discovered they were actively on my game, I would remove them. Even barring the potential for them to have learned from their mistakes, there are a few people in the hobby that I would immediately remove from my game just on past experiences.
@Cobalt So then is Saulot pretending to be other people? (Referring to the character list where Saulot claims to have been the same PC on TR as Warma.)
@Roz said in Empire Discussion Thread:
No, that’s not the behavior being described. It was using secret alts to give stuff to/generally benefit their main alt.
Yeah, but continuing to attempt that is just pestering Ada, right?
Yikes, secret hidden alts to keep pestering people that don’t want to be pestered by the player anymore. Bad look for sure.
@Tez said in Tough Calls:
I used to be a very evidence-based staffer.
I think evidence is still worthwhile, as sometimes, people can pass the vibe check, but still end up doing some horrible stuff, and evidence will get past the “oh, they’re good people, they pass my vibe check”, and can also indicate that maybe a review of the vibe one is looking for might be needed.
@Lemon-Fox said in Star Wars Age of Alliances: Hadrix and Cujo:
Cujo taking the time to talk to me rather than banning me speaks fairly well of him as a person.
@Ominous said in Prove Tez Wrong:
It’s also good advice for Blood on the Clocktower.
Tangentially, it strikes me that Blood on the Clocktower could easily be hosted using a MU codebase.
After 25 years of MUing, I’m of the opinion that people try to give others way too many chances.
I think the sweet spot for me as a staffer is 1. You get 1 screw up that I don’t ban you for, and I will let you know when you have spent your 1. When you screw up the second time, pack your bags.
Even then, there are exceptions. Particularly awful behavior will result in an instant ban with no discussion.
@Yam said in Empire Discussion Thread:
Man IDK guys is it really that hard to avoid bans? Are people just tripping into bans these days?
I feel like it’s less tripping into bans and more toxic players will be toxic players and staff have finally, at the end of 2025, reached the point where just throwing down the ban is the least headache and anxiety of any option.
@Lemon-Fox said in Missed Settings:
Exalted Battletech. When your mech is destroyed, you leap out with your sword.
I would only play Exalted Battletech if I could use Call the Blade to pull my Mech to me in the same fashion that the charm works for weapons. So I hold out my hand and my Mech just Kool-Aid Man crashes through a neighborhood to scoop me up and deposit me in the cockpit.
@Meg & @dvoraen If you both like PEAK, I would also recommend RV There Yet?, which is basically PEAK + chainsmoking + getting an RV to the top of the mountain.
@Pyrephox said in Empire Discussion Thread:
If Ada removes a lot of people, or removes people who aren’t, uh, pretty well already established as being Problems across several games, then the game will die and the problem will self-correct.
I don’t even think it’s that. It’s consistency. Staff needs to be consistent with how they respond to problems. The player in this case was being rude and pushy in Ada’s opinion, so they got a one and done ban. This needs to be consistent going forward. If other people are rude and pushy to Ada on the same level, they should also get a boot.
I can’t count the number of games I’ve seen with inconsistent staffing.
@Pavel said in Empire Discussion Thread:
Honestly? Probably curse of prior knowledge. She knows the system is there, expects it to be used, but also expects everyone else to also know the thing that she knows. Because psychology. It’s not a satisfactory thought, but it’s the only one I can think of given that I am, as yet, unable to read minds.
I totally agree with this. I think this also occurs when players don’t read all of the available game documentation and just assume something is X when it’s actually documented as Y. So this may be something documented either in game or on the Empire website that is just assumed as known in every interaction.
I know if I ever get the time to build a game, I’m going to have a big disclaimer that applying for a character indicates that the player is aware of the game’s policies and rules, and that lack of understanding of those documents is not accepted as an excuse for negative patterns of behavior.
@Pacha said in Empire Discussion Thread:
My assumption (perhaps false!) is that when opening a game one wants to develop a large and diverse base of players.
I feel like we’re reaching a point where new gamerunners are going to focus more on just running the game they want to run rather than running a game that attracts a large crowd.
@Alamias Sadly as much as I have been interested in this game for a while, my current lack of a strong gaming computer means I probably won’t be able to play this.
@Warma-Sheen said in Empire Discussion Thread:
Ada pages you: It shouldn’t really, but the proposal to hand over all of Kournis’ resources is the only action submitted which I cannot discern an in-character rationale for.
And this contradicts that earlier statement. It reads to me that no, scenes don’t need to be submitted because of the automatic scene logger. Also, Ada is trying to find an in-character rationale for an action which would only be provided by a log.
Also, in this day and age, the only people who would see this as over the top punitive are the kind of folks that need a one and done approach to problem removal to get the point through.
@Faraday said in Empire Discussion Thread:
The back and forth about the scene logger is a bit more perplexing. Ada seems to expect some evidence of RP (“I haven’t seen any substantive RP…”) yet does not clearly state how that evidence should be provided. Are they, in fact, expecting a log? An explanation in the job? A confirmation from the other player? I can understand WS’ frustration on the lack of clear instructions. But it sounds like maybe there was some prior history there (re: “we wrote out long explanations the last time, you said…”) so there might be more to the story.
As I understand it, scenes connected to actions are meant to be logged using the in game @scene command so that Ada can review the logs and make sure the RP matches the intent of the actions. I’m pretty sure I saw that in the game’s documentation somewhere.
