Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
aramike

A New Dawn...

Recommended Posts

You know what? We've been doing this fleet thing for years now ... and it seems as though we have to spend a helluva lot of time maintaining it.

If I were in charge, I'd say let's just start over. Get rid of all fleets, neutralize all assets, have everyone come in fresh, etc. I know it would be a lot of work, but hear me out on this...

If we want to keep people engaged in the game and the community, we have to keep providing something fresh. What could be more fresh than this?

We're already talking about contracting fleets and making structural changes. Why not give the newer members here a voice?

I can't remember a time where these discussions were more engaging and more lively than when we first started putting our heads together on creating the fleet structure. I simply think that maybe it's time that we start over.

For one thing, a lot of the members that helped get it all rolling in the first place are no longer active members here. Why not let the people who ARE active members put their stamp on the BC universe?

I know what I am about to propose is going to be EXTREMELY controversial, but here goes...

1: We should immediately create a BB rank of "Fleet Administrator" that is completely separate and isolated from and MP or RP roles. I would nominate Shohashi for this because he's been keeping a sinking ship from going under for quite some time now.

2: I know that I stand a roughly 75% chance of pissing Derek off over this, but I have to say it anyway. One thing about the "old" days when this all was really ramping up was, that as much as DS *****ed and moaned about us making feature requests, he actually put most of them in, including letting us allocate fleet and alliance assets. I think he should open up the BC universe again. "3000AD" should be retired. Let's let an era pass with grace and start writing an all-new chapter (heck, and all-new book). How about "3500AD"?

You all get where I'm going with this.

3: We create new fleets, with new alliances and new designations. We'll create a new "now" for the BC universe. This will allow us to consolidate and populate.

4: A group of experienced individuals writes an "official history" of the BC3K universe and the events that lead up to where we are today.

I know that this will involve a lot of old work being moved aside, but hey - Derek didn't just keep updating bc3K, did he? I think that it's time that, as a community we go out with the old ... and in with the new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, apart from whatever degree of comment you'll get from Derek, you're overlooking the fact that a lot of what you're talking about is Derek's IP, not just our sandbox. I would not therefore expect anything that's written into the games themselves to be open to change.

That does leave open the idea of revising the fleets since they were not part of the game universe officially, but I'm not sure I'd agree that most of the veterans are inactive and the newer people are more so. I've seen more of the newcomers come and go than I've seen of those veterans here today.

Not that my opinion on this counts for more than $.02, but you should examine your expectations I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to deleted post:

If I wanted to do any such thing I would have posted this in private and wanted to be in charge of it. Furthermore, I would like **** to be HEAVILY involved in anything we would do because he's an old-timer and knows what's going on.

Maybe you're somewhere that everyone else has passed, but it's fairly well-known that I have NO ILL WILL against **** WHATSOEVER, and consider him both a GREAT GUY and a FRIEND, and I would NEVER wish to exclude him from ANYTHING.

What happened between **** and I concerns

only him and I, PERIOD! If you are privy to that conversation, then you know that it should be kept PRIVATE. Somehow, though, I have a feeling that you're NOT privy to it considering that you just registered a few days ago and have posted a sum of 4 times. Never, EVER bring that subject up in public again.

That is as clear as I'm going to be about it. Don't test me. I respect EVERY member of this community and as that is the proper thing to do, I expect you to follow that lead and not air ANY "dirty laundry". Those who are in the "know", know. No one else needs to. Clear?

Back on topic:

I simply want to go back to the days when this place was hoppin' and get EVERYONE involved.

quote:


Well, apart from whatever degree of comment you'll get from Derek, you're overlooking the fact that a lot of what you're talking about is Derek's IP, not just our sandbox. I would not therefore expect anything that's written into the games themselves to be open to change.

Nope. Derek is still in charge of all things and it is still his universe. Just look back at the time when BCM was still in the pipeline. The forum was probably 10X as active.

quote:


That does leave open the idea of revising the fleets since they were not part of the game universe officially...

Exactly.

quote:


but I'm not sure I'd agree that most of the veterans are inactive and the newer people are more so.

Wha????

Search for topics involving the following names:

Rattler

Akira (was known as "Ron Wallin")

Blades

Greg Miller

Gudihl (had different alias)

Etc.

If you go back to a few months prior to the BCM launch, you'll see a difference in activity.

Let me make this clear: I do NOT wish to invalidate ANYONE's work, or go off on my own tangent here - DS and the other old vets know me better than that.

I'm simply doing what got us this community in the first place - thinking outside of the box.

quote:


Not that my opinion on this counts for more than $.02, but you should examine your expectations I think.

Everyone's opinion counts here. And, as I've said, I have NO expectations whatsoever.

I simply wanted to throw something different out there. I just want to get something going here again. Have you noticed how we can hardly even find someone WILLING to lead Prime Fleet?

Imagine how fun it was to be there when it all started? That's where I'm advocating we go.

[ 07-25-2006, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: aramike ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, we need to do something to really bring this Community back to it's former glory. Over the past few years, I've seen plenty of newbs come and then leave. I think it's because of nothing for them to do. If we can generate more interest and give everyone a purpose, it'd help the community.

Aramike's idea may be something to look at in this regard.

-Sho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Rattler

Akira (was known as "Ron Wallin")

Blades

Greg Miller

Gudihl (had different alias)


Now there are some names I've not heard in quite some time around here.

But back on topic The idea does have merit and would get people involved and help them take "ownership" of their ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure Rattler could be enticed back here, I know a number of you have his contact details, it's definitely worth a try. Both Blades and Ristar have made appearances, promising to return more fully at a later date (I have had further personal assurances in that regard from Ristar). Jerold Keenan has recently become active again within ISS, though has yet to make a significant comeback at these forums (I'm sure he could, he's just catching up with all that we have changed while he was away, and is going to be taking part in fleet action). Aramike and WeeGee recently came back and are contributing to the community.

We at ISS are currently working on or planning a number of projects that could be offered to the community as a whole (Marc is pretty overloaded with them all), if anyone else here is skilled in programming php-nuke, we can make them community-wide projects and host them at a fleet-neutral site (or here if SC is in favour).

As far as the fleets themselves are concerned, there are a number of areas with plenty of room:

The Gammulan Alliance is basically dead, and has been for a long time. That is virgin territory ripe for positive and imaginative ideas, wherever they come from.

The other races haven't been explored at all, again ripe for new and imaginatve ideas.

Raiders: I'm sure plenty of people long to be the scourge of the space lanes, either on their own or as part of a wolfpack.

Corporations: InterCorp Unlimited put all the fleets to shame for a while with its activity adn the enthusiasm of it's members, then somehow faltered and faded away, I can't remember the reasons for that. I know that another one is being planned at the moment, but there's always room for more than one.

The existing fleets: some of them do appear to be static and inflexible, with their core structure and purpose set in stone.

That can be a positive thing when it is used as a solid foundation to build on and progress, when you have a definite direction and vision for your fleet that people can buy into, but when structures that serve no practical purpose are held on to because that's the way things have always been done, people's enthusiasm gets drained away.

I love unconventional thinking (as some of you may have noticed ), taking a step (or 5 ) back and evaluating why we do things the way we do, being prepared to make radical changes to achieve something worthwhile and enable a new form of activity that people will enjoy.

Let's start a 'What do you want fleets to be?' thread where we can have input from absolutely anyone, we can discuss new ideas, adopting, adapting and building on the good ones, letting people know that we value their input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no need to wipe the slate clean. What would be the point and purpose? Change for the sake of change is foolhardy.

There is a fleet structure. If any changes need to be done, its that fleets with inactive or too few members, be de-activated (e.g. Orion) until further notice and its members moved to another fleet (e.g. Prime).

The game universe is set in stone and I have no intentions of changing it.

Changing a fleet name or structure is not a big deal (thats why a dB is used), but it serves little or no purpose if you're only going to be changing names for the heck of it.

Apart from what is already nailed down for UCO, no features are going into the games. Especially since UCSE/UCLE are the final games in the series. Not only in terms of tech, but also in terms of premise. Thats why UCO will retain that.

I currently pay $250/month for four mp servers. Out of my own pocket. Apart from a positional update glitch in fp multiplayer - and which is a ***** to resolve, given the existing architecture - the mp kernel works just fine; especially in space. After all, we started out with BC series being a space sim.

UCO will no doubt facilitate a bit of change and will most likely better promote member activities. The bottom line is that when someone is paying a monthly fee to play a game, they have more of an incentive to actively participate I think.

For now, you folks need to make the best - and the most - of what I have provided. Failing that, go play something else. I hear Eve is still recruiting. Have fun with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


For now, you folks need to make the best - and the most - of what I have provided.

Fair enough, then.

-Sho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than fair.

Come on guys, there is tons of room to be creative within the existing structures, you just need to use your imaginations.

Isn't AWA freeform enough for you ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Why not give the newer members here a voice? ... Why not let the people who ARE active members put their stamp on the BC universe?

I'd guess at least half of the fleet players now holding lead positions were once n00bs standing on the sidelines, learning the Ins and Outs of the 3000AD universe. Those of us who decided it to be worthwhile stuck around and filled slots vacated by three-digit (or less) veterans. I don't think that situation has changed ... active n00bs still have a voice and the opportunity to make contributions and changes to game play and organization. Both in RP and on line.

I suspect the next big surge in membership will materialize when the light of UCO can be clearly seen at the end of the tunnel. Emphasis has already shifted away from role play to multiplay and the shift will almost certainly continue. Any major reorganization should be done with that in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Failing that, go play something else. I hear Eve is still recruiting. Have fun with that.

quote:

Eve? Meh! I'd rather watch grass grow.

What's the difference between those two choices?

Okay, on to my reason for posting.

quote:

We at ISS are currently working on or planning a number of projects that could be offered to the community as a whole (Marc is pretty overloaded with them all), if anyone else here is skilled in programming php-nuke, we can make them community-wide projects and host them at a fleet-neutral site (or here if SC is in favour).

Something that I'd propose is that ISS can already be considered in some sensea fleet-neutral site. Let me elaborate:

How is Fleet content hosted?

1. The fleets have topic threads and an official membership database here at 3000AD. However, they are not part of the official canon of the 3000AD universe, so it sort of makes sense that their distinctive content wouldn't be hosted at the official site. That said, the official site has historically been the way that people find the fleets.

2. The fleets currently host all their distinctive content on their own individual sites, but this has disadvantages. Namely, one must locate and then regularly check all the various sites and their various forum threads to stay up to date on their doings. That's a lot of work if everyone were to be as busy as I know ISS has been (and as busy as we'd like the fleet community to be). On the other hand, these sites emerged from the need for fleets to discuss internal matters and to host distinctive content that would highlight their organization and advantages as a fleet for the purposes of prestige and recruiting.

Now, let's take a moment to examine ISS' context. ISS is the support, logistics, and intelligence-gathering arm of GALCOM. ISS and CIOPS would normally service allied fleets and compile information on enemy fleet strength and movements (respectively).

What if relevant fleet content and selected forum topic areas were hosted at ISS in the form of logistical support (for allies) and "intelligence briefs" or "emergency action messages" (for enemies)? There is a good rationale to host any fleet content at ISS since it's RP context is an information and support clearinghouse, and this is especially true of inter-fleet content.

The existing fleet sites would continue to exist in their present form because in many cases they don't do much more than serve forums for their members. That said, I've already seen the extra stuff Prime and the Insurgent site host to describe themselves. That content could either stay or migrate to ISS at the discretion of their leadership; the ISS site could easily absorb that content in new or existing modules, perhaps by "wrapping" that content into existing structures in ISS that compile reference information. The same is true for any and all other fleets. That content would presumably be supported/generated by the owning fleet, and implemented in coordination with ISS personnel if it wasn't just uploaded to a pre-selected FTP folder.

The official site would continue to function as it always has: 1) as the official record of membership, and 2) as the best way to direct players to fleet activities. No changes needed or requested.

The advantages of this approach are thus:

1. It emphasizes RP elements for each fleet. The game's background text is all told from the perspective of GALCOM anyway, so this gives our Insurgent friends a chance to be even more "infamous," and for our GALCOM friends to actually plug in to an actual service presentation by the fleet responsible for logistics.

2. It centralizes fleet content and inter-fleet discussions so one doesn't have to search out several sites to put together the bigger picture. It's interesting that there's lot of discussion going on, but it's spread out to the point where it seems pretty thin if you don't read broadly.

3. Fleets can contribute to one another within a common software framework. In other words, if developers in one fleet develop a good custom module, other fleets can gain the benefit of that module. Inter-fleet development efforts can be more coordinated, and developer efficiency goes up.

4. Proprietary or "secret" information can continue to be hosted on the individual fleet sites, and there is a clear distinction between classified and declassified information.

5. ...

Well, there is no five. I could probably sit and think and make something up, but this is getting longish, and it's honestly kind of a musing at the moment. Also, what I'm suggesting is more of a thought experiment at the moment, so I wouldn't want to get too far down the road here before I'd heard some reaction, especially from other ISS leadership since it's our site I'm suggesting as the central depository.

That said, the key idea is this: ISS can be considered a "fleet-neutral" site in the sense that all fleets can be well-represented there in a way that reinforces their (and our) RP role.

So... thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×