Tobias Rieper
|
Event 3 - After action threadYeesh! that was COLD. Well, thanks to all the crew that made that one so good, thanks to the organisers for their hard work and the players for theirs.
Just wish it hadn't been quite as cold for putting down tents - it's not nice when they are wet, but cold and wet is especially unpleasant. Ah well, that's english weather for you.
Did anyone get any pictures?
Right, that's it for now - i'm off to bed! (yes, i really am that tired - the noise from "team rum" kept me up pretty late!)
Dan/Tobias
|
Bar
|
Re: Event 3 - After action thread | Tobias Rieper wrote: | | Social/Combat light version (aka: a normal event) |
Don't think you've been entirely fair in your summation there to be honest fella.
Certainly the split to me sounded like one high paranoia combat heavy event, and the other as a social afair with no combat.
And to be honest, I would prefer to go to both. Whether as an alternate characetr or otherwise.
|
Jimmymick
|
Welp I'm crew so both...
I am NOT taking my shirt off and getting all covered in sticky cack if it is that cold again though!
|
Tobias Rieper
|
Re: Event 3 - After action thread | Bar wrote: | | Tobias Rieper wrote: | | Social/Combat light version (aka: a normal event) |
Don't think you've been entirely fair in your summation there to be honest fella...........
....... the other as a social affair with no combat.
|
That 'ent quite what Andrew said at our debrief.
Well, not once we'd pinned him down on the issue anyway...............
..............says I, hastily stuffing the "interrogation gear" back into it's locker 
|
Tobias Rieper
|
Interesting replies to the poll however.
If you are comfortable with it, would y'all post up which option you chose, and why? I think that Jon/Gerwynn/Andrew/Etc would appreciate the feedback.
I chose the non blood and guts version, as my character ain't really a fightin' type, although he does tend to go around armed - mainly for his own protection.
Thanks in advance,
Dan.
|
Capn Renshaw
|
Personally I'd like a regular type event.
Having the camp hit by nasties pulls everyone together inclduing the non-combat types and the interaction is always great regardless of the action.
I enjoy both aspects of it, the pag and pew pew as well as the talking and mocking of Prince and I think that running a split event will detract from that as folks will only get the chance to interact with half of the player base and everyone plays really interesting characters that only having half of them to bounce off won't generate the safe atmosphere.
I'm sure it'll be fun all round regardless but I'd personally prefer a normal style event.
My 2 cents. 
|
Jon
|
I'm very interested to hear peoples full feedback on this, the conversations I had with people during debrief on the subject have been the subject of much discussion already and it seems our initial thought that people would appreciate an alternative option to the 'high combat' (which I must reassure does not mean 'exclusivly combat') event we'd had planned for Event 4 since the start of the campaign.
|
Lily
|
Personally I don't like the idea of a split event - a regular event can have both, without splitting groups etc - and it would be a nightmare trying to choose which to be honest. For a crew that does both (as we do), it would be hell - so not a great idea . Plus, when we're all on events, we want to see the other crews too - which is part of the enjoyment of the game - lets face it , as Renshaw says "...the talking and mocking of Prince..." wouldn't be half as much fun if the other group chose a different event...
Regular event works for me. | Quote: | | Having the camp hit by nasties pulls everyone together inclduing the non-combat types and the interaction is always great regardless of the action. |
Plus, a combat event or a social event would mean that engineers/mechanics go where?
My opinion.
Cheers.
|
Tobias Rieper
|
| Jon wrote: | | which I must reassure does not mean 'exclusively combat' |
Now, you see, that isn't how it sounded when you first talked about it Jon.
Andrew advertising "Major risk of character death" during our debrief, kinda reinforced this view.
Personally, i'd prefer to see it run as a single event - be it overly heavy in combat or otherwise. I echo Lilly in that i would prefer to see a more rounded cross section of crews at the event - rather than just those who are out to kill someone/something.
|
JennyScott
|
I don't want to split the playerbase. As our beloved captain Fa said in our crew debrief, a lot of the fun of Serenity in the series, the film and the game is the way that people have to work outside their comfort zone. Mal and Kaylee at the fancy party in 'Shindig', Kaylee utterly failing to shoot anyone in 'War Stories', Inara with her bow and arrow, shooting reavers in the movie... A lot of the fun is having to do something that you have never done before, and are not necessarily any good at.
I'd love to see our big lugs in suits and ties for a fancy party. I'd love to see our socialites cowering under tables while Reavers try to break in through the windows. I'd especially love all of the other players to be there, because we all have such a great rapport (and such a lot of pvp playing) that if some of us are absent, I think we will all suffer for it.
|
Capt Tom Crowson
|
Must admit that intially I thought it was a good idea but having read some of the arguments above I agree that splitting the events would potentially split the player base, and whilst from an organisers point of view it might make things easier to monitor, I think that would split people up
Manes that there is the potential that say Capt Tom goes to the combat one cos the rest of his crew of combat monkeys but we all want to play together, then he'll die. Vice versa if the rest of Capt Toms' crew come along to the social shindig they'll be bored cos they've only just learned to count to 10
So agree that a mix would probably be good. Whilst I'm not averse to a bit of a gunfight, I think I'd find crawling through bushes with Reavers on my tail to be less fun. If theres enough elements in there to keep everyone happy then thats the key.
I found this one more enjoyable due to there being more Core-worlders there so more people to work off. I spent more time talking to the NPC Companion than I did any of the Gun-sharks. But I think I'd miss them if they werent there
|
XavierYu
|
Well, I know my ship left early so we missed what the plans for next event are, but...
I think some of my carnies were a bit bored at times sitting around with nowt to do. Too much high falutin' doesn't suit them. On the other hand, me and Ben/Dom definitely enjoyed the civilised conversations and negotiations.
Splitting the event completely doesn't seem like such a good idea tho. I like having the sixty people, made it feel like a real big affair. Didn't even get to meet some of the people.
An attack on camp scenario gets everyone involved. I wouldn't be involved in a way my character would appreciate, but whatever. I fully agree with the pushing the comfort zones point.
I would like there to be some negotiations and politicing tho...
So I think our ship would prefer more action, but not pure action? Can't really talk for everyone, but that's the feel I got.
I'd hate to be splitting the crew, I like having the carnies around and I'd hate to be all alone in the 'verse without the carnies to protect me.
On the other hand, I'd hate to see them bored.
And finally, I'd hate to just be fighting all the time.
If it had to be a split event, ideally it'd be in a way that the shuttle could take the carnies off? Meaning they could do more combat, and we could do more socialising? I guess. That's still not ideal tho.
|
Chad
|
| Capt Tom Crowson wrote: | | I found this one more enjoyable due to there being more Core-worlders there so more people to work off. I spent more time talking to the NPC Companion than I did any of the Gun-sharks. But I think I'd miss them if they werent there |
Hey we're all really well educated! 'Cept Bar of course. Well, Prince hides it very well and i'm not counting Tiny.
Anyways, i actually have no preference....
If the event is ultra-combat then i look forward to a frantic Cortex Uplink fix in the middle of a sh*tstorm firefight. (Chad doesn't by the way... bullets make nasty holes that hurt).
If its social/political/intrigue event then its kinda the same to me without the bullets. Though Chad would likely scream incoherently a little less at a civilised gathering. 
One idea that was suggested was alternative characters. Now, I fully appreciate all the downsides of temporary characters:
Splitting crews
Diluting long-term character development
Resetting the dynamics between Crews
...and so on!
But... the chance to turn up to an event with cigars, bad attitude and a REALLY big gun does kind of appeal. 
However, thats very much a personal point of view and certainly won't be everyones cup of proverbial.
|
Shikoba
|
I think first of we need to clarify something. This is not one single split event but in fact two seperate events one of which a large section of the player base will be unable to attend. Which event that is depends on the type of character they play.
From my point of view the very best thing about Serenity is the players, ALL of them, the dynamic between the characters, the individual personalities and their interactions if we remove half of the players we have lost half of the fun. I have always felt that the Series Firefly was about the characters and that was what made it stand out among the plethora of scifi feyu out there. It was all about the bonds created between a diverse group of individuals surviving in a hostile environment, it was about plot and story line rather than just shoot em up. Take away the social dynamic and you just some yet another science fiction non entity. The combat is important, i enjoy the fight wheither I'm involved or not, running from gun fire is just as much fun as yelling "DOUBLE KNOCK BACK" panicing about your people where are they? did they survive? makes for good role play even if you don't have a gun in your hand. Please avoid mistaking non combat characters with players who have no wish to be involved in combat and combat character who have no interest in socalising with other individuals. I'm not talking tea and cake here but simple banter chat and hanging out together all of which can be done in other situations than some sort of formal shindig. It's also already been mentioned that there are many characters that fall in between like the cortexers and mechanics. A healthy and balanced crew tends to be made up of both combat and non combatant characters so the suggested restrictions would split crews down the middle.
Now it was also said that one of the events may be a single day event and when I asked which one I was told the social event, so No it was not to be a standard format event at all.
From a personal point of view, I work hard on Serenity, I have since day one so being told I can't attend one of the events frankly hurt probbably more so as I actually play what is essentially an social combat character. In fact I think that distinctions applies to the majority of players. Certainly all the combat characters I know are extremely social and I feel it is a shame that the refs are so disconnected from the game that they've not been able to realise this.
There is a solution
Perhaps we can work it out together
maybe run a longer event with the combat section at the begining and enough game world time in between to allow for the character to meet up at a safe place later to lick their wounds and socialise, maybe then you can give people the option to be involved or not with a sliding fee.
Or better yet run it as the two events it really is but again make sure there is actual game time for the characters to attend both if they wish to.
|
Shikoba
|
As an additional point I think alternative characters would cause even more issues in the adminsistration than exist at the moment.
I'd rather see the logistics for the current characters right first (stats, background info etc) than add to the burden by generating some random shallow thing for a one of event.
|
Jon
|
| Shikoba wrote: | | I feel it is a shame that the refs are so disconnected from the game that they've not been able to realise this. |
That hurts, a lot.
The assumption that the split event was designed to exclude players is entirely wrong, the split event idea originally evolved from the desire to provide players who did not wish to attend a high risk event with a way to engage in the plot handled during that event simultaneously in a different surrounding.
We're running Serenity LRP, we have been running Serenity LRP since the start, that involves a very specific 'verse spanning event that we need to handle in game. Peoples feedback so far has been in opposition to the concept of a split event, therefore we're probably going to abandon the idea, this is why we have a feedback mechanism.
|
Gonner Hendershot
|
Now, now children.
I have already mentioned my thoughts on this matter to Andrew at the debrief, and he has suggested a linking of Events 4 & 5 as a mini-arc of some sort. Effectively Event 4 will be some reasonably large event, and Event 5 will follow on several days later in game, where we will be dealing with the aftermath and the fallout of Event 4 (Please correct me if I have this wrong Andrew).
Despite appearances I don't play a combat character, I prefer a reasonably well-rounded character who can handle himself in low-level combat effectively.
I agree with the sentiment echoed here that it is the diversity of the crews and the characters in those crews that helps to give the events the enjoyment and the range of mayhem that keeps me coming back for more. Going to one extreme or the other, almost completely combat or almost no combat is I feel an unneeded deviation from what is and has been a winning formula.
All I ask from the refs is a character card, the occasional combat encounter and enough plot to keep me entertained. Well, that and the promise of no more outdoor events in November  .
|
Tobias Rieper
|
| Gonner Hendershot wrote: |
All I ask from the refs is a .....promise of no more outdoor events in November . |
Seconded
++Shivers++
way too chilly for my liking, tho' it seemed like a great idea when first suggested.
|
Jon
|
| Gonner Hendershot wrote: | | Well, that and the promise of no more outdoor events in November . |
Noted, losing my gloves early on Friday evening proved a little inconvienient given the weather.
|
DrugCrazedPony
|
So, do you guys have any idea when the next event(s) will be yet, or at least which weekends I should keep free?
Weekends in 2008 are starting to fill up for me already. would hate to have to cancel something for the next one.
|
Lee Shaw
|
| Shikoba wrote: | | I actually play what is essentially an social combat character. In fact I think that distinctions applies to the majority of players. |
I suspect the distinction is less about whether the characters could hold their own in the given situation (and as has been mentioned it can be immense fun playing a social retard at the ball or a pacifist in a firefight), but more whether they would be there. If the "combat" event has a setup like "Planet Worksop is under seige by gangers! We need heavily armed people to fight them off, big cash prizes!" then the crews of some of the more mercantile-oriented or dilettante-style crews would struggle to find a reason to attend, effectively excluding them. Even people who can handle themselves in a fight may be loath to walk into one.
That's a pretty big assumption on my part, though, and comes mostly from reading this thread.
|
JennyScott
|
Yes, but I think that the idea that most people are unhappy with is the assumption that you won't miss out if you don't attend one of the games.
As characters, that is absolutely true. Jenny doesn't want to fight reavers, ever. However, as roleplayers we come to Serenity to have fun, and I usually have more fun when my characters have a bloody awful time of it
If they split the event, I as a character will be much happier, as there will be less chance of having my face eaten by space monsters. As a player however I'll be unhappy to miss a chance (any chance!) to play Serenity with all of my friends. I'd rather play a game with all of the other players in the same place at the same time, and if that means that Jenny gets her face eaten, that's just hard cheese for her. I will want to play the event whatever kind of event it is, and I'll want all of my friends and enemies to be there!
|
Shikoba
|
| Lee Shaw wrote: | | I suspect the distinction is less about whether the characters could hold their own in the given situation (and as has been mentioned it can be immense fun playing a social retard at the ball or a pacifist in a firefight), but more whether they would be there. |
Then my example still applies. There are a lot of characters who are in fact combat characters who would probbaly rather avoid a fight but if it comes down to it and they need the cash well folks have to do what they must. Just because they're not wondering around heavily armed yelling, "we're up for a fight" doesn't mean they are not willing to have one nor does it mean the players don't want to be involved.
I think msot folks agree the best thing about Serenity is the players and role playing with those other players as their characters.
| Jon wrote: | | That hurts, a lot. |
I'm sorry it really wasn't meant to and no one believes it was designed to exclude players, but only perhaps that it had not been realised how much it would.
I do feel that due to the refing format the refs are missing the atmosphere and interaction of the game and as such missing out on a lot of the fun of it themselves. It's very easy to overlook aspects of the game the players really enjoy when there is no direct ref involvement, and social interaction rarely requires a ref to be there.
I think most ref teams have suffered from this at some point or another.
I really do think it's worth each ref taking a break taking a name, an accent and going and seeing where the party is. I know we had a tent full of gunsharks and friends all happily socilaising IC until 4am and it was one of the best parts of the weekends. all refs and of duty monsters are welcome to join us as a shikoba buddy and come and have fun.
| Jon wrote: | | Noted, losing my gloves early on Friday evening proved a little inconvienient given the weather. |
You should have said, we had spares.
|
Jon
|
| Shikoba wrote: | | I do feel that due to the refing format the refs are missing the atmosphere and interaction of the game and as such missing out on a lot of the fun of it themselves. |
It's a good point and certainly a major factor in why I'm still burnt out two weeks later. We seem to run the games we want to play and play games the way we want them run, I'm looking forward to a 2009 season where I can potentially play an event but know I'd spend most of it in the ref hut feeding back on encounters and issuing orders.
As for 2008, once I actually get an evening where I'm not exhausted and covered in mud from our current attempts at digging a foundation trench below the water table, I'll be on the phone to the sites we've got our eyes on and post dates asap.
|
Shikoba
|
Hmm winter mud, all mud is annoying but winter mud even mroe so.
Pleae do take time out of what ever event you are running to get involved int eh social side of it We've all run foul of that when running games as it's easy to get caught up in the admin side of things but it is just as important to go out and see what the players are actually doing and even more so to take time out and go and role play. It's your hobby as well and the players enjoy having refs role play just as much as anyone else.
|
Grace
|
now you see I haven't put anything in the poll as you haven't given an option for both if its possible. Also I'm going to agree with Heather here. I suspect that most people would think the gunsharks would go to the combat heavy event , and not a socialising event, cos that is what we appear to be, a combat group, firstly not all of us are - we cover most types of people from gunbunnies to non-com specialists. Whilst we may appear to take jobs that are high risk shooty things, and we often do, we are not suicidal and we also enjoy r & r as much as anyone else, as our behaviour at the last event can testify to. A lot of what we enjoy is roleplaying with everyone else and not having to organise anything cos most of us do at the other games we play. So whilst we would probably go to a high combat event it would be as much to play the game and see everyone else as it would be to get us some shhoting in. We would also want to go to the social event cos thats fun toa, as we said to Jon at the end of last event.
I am not speaking for all the gunsharks here as some may disagree with me but this is my opinion on it all. Shooting is fun but so are all the other parts of the game. Going somewhere on a suicide mission is certainly not on Grace's agenda.
Tash
|
Jarhead
|
I suppose it is the fact that we are playing a game that needs balancing for the different abilities of characters (and interest of players) in combat that has provoked all this discussion, but it always seems to me that if you are any kind of adventurer then trouble will find you whether you want it to or not.
My character is definitely non-combatant: no armour, no weapon, no clue how to use one if he did, so would almost certainly come out the loser in any arse-kicking contest - but that's what gunsharks are for, to protect people like me from people like them..
I wouldn't willingly walk into a situation that would get me killed but you don't always get dealt the cards you want.
And if I had to I'd grab the biggest gun I could find and start blasting...
I wouldn't avoid an event just because it threatened to be comabt heavy, but I would need a reason for my character to be there - whether I knew that a fight was going to happen or not.
|
Broz
|
Well there may be groups who can provide protective services.
Some may even be able to both on the Mud and in the Black, should the koor ve'vut be good and tight...
|
Prince
|
| Grace wrote: |
I am not speaking for all the gunsharks here as some may disagree with me but this is my opinion on it all. Shooting is fun but so are all the other parts of the game. Going somewhere on a suicide mission is certainly not on Grace's agenda.
Tash |
Really? Dang, suicide missions are awesome...
My 2p is that I really don't mind if there's a split event (high combat vs high social) or not.
What I do really want is for the next event to be high combat, so I can really get my gun on and the Gunshark gunbunnies can have some high-wire thrills - but whether attendance at this kind of event would preclude attendance at an IC concurrent high social event doesn't bother me. I wouldn't feel I was missing out. Equally, if the events are arranged IC consecutively so that attendance at both can be done, that's fine.
Just so long as there's a high combat event in the immediate future, I'm all kinds of happy
Minty
|
Grace
|
| Prince wrote: |
Really? Dang, suicide missions are awesome...
Minty |
Excellent, next time we get involved in gunfights you can go first then .
Tash xx
|
Earl
|
| Grace wrote: | | Prince wrote: |
Really? Dang, suicide missions are awesome...
Minty |
Excellent, next time we get involved in gunfights you can go first then .
Tash xx |
But i'll have nothing to do!
ANDY
|
JennyScott
|
I've been looking at my calendar for 2008 and I 'd like to change my vote...
I'll be attending event 4 whatever the heck it is, so long as you don't hold it in June, when there are too many weddings 
|
Kix
|
I'll go to whatever, but would like to see two events (one of each) and this is for one reason and one reason alone at that is: I will have more chance of get the time off work to attend at lest one of them. Being a shift worker the later the dates are fixed, the less chance I have of making it!
|
|
|
