Time Compression - Again

[rorax]

AL - is there a decision regarding this?

[Blindhamsterman]

id be inclined to say it will just make life even more difficult for low level casters (except clerics that can fight almost as well as warriors)

[Riotnrrd]

AFAIK we're just waiting on AL to implement this. Support for the change was overwhelmingly positive, and I heard remarkably little resistance after the beta test period was complete.

[AcadiusLost]

I'm dealing with one mess at a time, presently. The 1.23 conversion takes priority over time compression. The poll above demonstrates that there's still a pretty significant slice of our membership who is really opposed to the change, despite ostensibly having a chance to "try it and see" during the 2-week trial phase. I'm not all that keen to implement changes that may aggravate/drive off players. If I'd built the poll, I would have tried to include some graded responses to gauge what proportion of the respondents were actually "strongly opposed".

As it stands, it's no work whatsoever to leave it at the same 7-minute hours we've had since 2002 or whenever it was decided. To switch it over, we'd not only need to apply the change to both Live servers, but the build teams for both modules would have to consider changing all their spawn point refresh intervals to compensate for the change in game-hours (lest everything double in relative length). As I suspect a number of those builders are among the "opposed" number in the poll above, I am hesitant to oblige them to spend their time accounting for an unwelcome change, rather than using to to work on content that can be more widely appreciated.

I may reconsider the matter after things settle down from the 1.23 conversion, but for now it's not something I'm actively considering.

[Riotnrrd]

I'm strongly for this change, so I'll include some comments here.

I'm dealing with one mess at a time, presently. The 1.23 conversion takes priority over time compression.

Understandable. Perhaps when 1.23 is stable we can flip the switch.

The poll above demonstrates that there's still a pretty significant slice of our membership who is really opposed to the change, despite ostensibly having a chance to "try it and see" during the 2-week trial phase.

How does the poll, or the comments in the attached threads, show anyone (besides Curmudgeon) is 'really opposed'? The majority of the comments I've read have been strongly for the change. I see very little commentary from builders or DMs (aside from Curm!)

If I'd built the poll, I would have tried to include some graded responses to gauge what proportion of the respondents were actually "strongly opposed".

What about people who are strongly for? In reading all available comments, enhanced RP is the number one reason people seem to be in favor. Does a strong negative opinion carry more weight?

As I suspect a number of those builders are among the "opposed" number in the poll above, I am hesitant to oblige them to spend their time accounting for an unwelcome change, rather than using to to work on content that can be more widely appreciated.

I only see one negative comment from a builder, Curmudgeon. Is there other private feedback you have received besides what's posted here? Respectfully, if other builders or DMs are opposed, then where are their comments? (Again, not including Curmudgeon. Thanks Curmudgeon!) Serious question: does a builder comment or vote count for more than someone else's? Don't know if there's an easy answer, but we should probably know if that's the case.

I do see this as a 61% (rounding down) in favor (throwing out the dont cares), which according to Rotku would suggest this is something to consider moving forward with.

[HEEGZ]

I was under the impression that we were not changing from the existing timing. Though I prefer the new timing, I thought it had been decided to leave the old rate in existence. I thought I had posted somewhere to this effect in the Admin forum. I agree fully with AL's sentiments above for the reasons he has posted.

[rorax]

Hey Tech guys, DMs, builders and admins...


Any news about this issue? now that we're after the 1.23 patch?

[HEEGZ]

Going from memory, I believe it was decided to not change the time compression. AL can give you a definitive answer though.

[Riotnrrd]

Who decided not to change it?

Why poll the playerbase if the results are discarded?

[Spider Jones]

I'd guess it's extremely low on the priorities list for tech team. Those in favor of the change will just have to wait a decade or two until they're all caught up on the more important bits.

[Rotku]

Who decided not to change it?

In answer to that, see the post above:

AL can give you a definitive answer though.

Why poll the playerbase if the results are discarded?

The poll has not been disregarded. It was said right from the beginning that a large majority will be needed to make the change. Should AL decide not to make the change (I don't think it's decided for sure either way yet), it is based on the fact that he does not believe a large enough number of people support the change.

[Blindhamsterman]

still againsts it from where Im sitting, I quite like the current time rate, It could maybe do with being a little slowe (maybe 10 mins) but doubling the time it takes for characters that rely soley on spells to do anything means suddenly we get to play less as due to issues raised in another thread, all too often you'll use your spells all in one go while playing with a friend or two, they'll have to go and no one else is about, or they are on the other side of the server and suddenly you cant do squat..

14 RL mins per IG hour means suddenly I have to wait 5 1/2 RL hours (roughly) to be able to memorise more spells, less of a problem for the warrior type, or for already high level spell casters, crippling for level 1 spellcasting PCs (who already get it real hard as it is)

alternatly, allowing people to rest every 12 hours while doubling the time progression rate would be a nice compromise (more time each IG day to roleplay, without causing issues for certain types of players)