2 dismissals We need to talk about the game mode Revolution

[Hepatica]

Plain and simple, I do not believe revolution is a good game mode for the current state of our High RP server. My reasoning for thinking this are as follows;

 

This is a High RP server. People's characters are generally set in stone for how they act, their personality, what they will and won't do, etc. People are always going to be reluctant, if not flat out refuse, to break that mold that their character has fit into, possibly for years. While gamemodes like cult involve an eldritch being corrupting your mind and compelling you act differently, Rev is nothing of the sort. Instead, you have to rely on what the revs set up to influence how your character would act, and put plain and simply, most rev gimmicks have been done a thousand times, and there are barely any new gimmicks that people actually care to interact with. Most rev rounds, I think we can all agree, tend to follow the same mold of, announcement is created, everyone ignores it, the end. On top of these reasons, going along with most rev situations is absolutely ludicrous. You are a nanotrasen station in biesel. An uprising that goes along with rev rounds is going to get your character killed or jailed 100% of the time, no matter what you do, there is literally no escaping this as Nanotrasen would send a team to apprehend you once they found out the situation, be it Odin security when you arrive on the Odin, be it phoenix or some other team if you decide to remain on station. Even if your character isn't worried about getting arrested, you are screwed job wise for the rest of your life, companies would never hire someone who took part in a revolution in their work place, especially if it was a violent one. As a result no sane character is going to go along with such a hopeless situation.

 

I have 3 suggestions for revolution in light of this.

1. Remove revolution until NBT. While NSS Aurora is just a station, NBT (The plans staff have to move us from the NSS Aurora to a Nanotrasen(?) ship) is a ship that can go, I would assume, anywhere. Revolution is far, far easier aboard a vessel like this and gives more options and more capability for characters to reasonably go along with things. While it doesn't fix every issue, such as characters acting in ways they wouldn't normally, it would still be better then what we have currently, IMO.

2. Revert revolution from fellowship and contenders to loyalists and revolutionaries. While I don't believe, personally, that this is a good overall fix to the issues I've brought up, if people are really against getting rid of revolution, I believe this revert would at least help things somewhat. At least from what I've noticed, people tend to be completely lost or unsure of what to do as contender and fellowship, and as a result rounds flounder far, far more often then when it was loyalists/revolutionaries. Maybe I'm wrong on this, obviously I can't be present for every single rev round, but I still think it would help even a little bit.

3. Remove Revolution. Honestly, I don't believe revolution is a game mode meant for a high RP server like ours. It relies too heavily on people acting in ways their character probably wouldn't act, as I've stated above, for what is 90% of the time not a good reason what so ever. While I'm against entirely removing a gamemode, especially not with anything to replace it, I do feel like we have so many good gamemodes to choose from currently that missing rev would not be the end of the world, and maybe in the mean time someone far smarter then myself could come up with some new gamemode to replace it all together.

 

That's my two cents on the matter. I happily encourage anyone and everyone to write alternative solutions, criticize what I've said above, or post their support in the comments bellow. It should be noted of course, that most everything I've posted above is my opinion on the matter, based on what I've had others say about the game mode, and how I feel about the game mode from what I've seen and experienced.

[armrha]

I was under the impression that rev rounds aren't canon, so what Odin would do or how it would affect your career seem completely irrelevant; none of it counts for anything in your canon character history. Is that wrong?

[Hepatica]

1 minute ago, armrha said:

I was under the impression that rev rounds aren't canon, so what Odin would do or how it would affect your career seem completely irrelevant; none of it counts for anything in your canon character history. Is that wrong?

You're suppose to RP as if your character's life doesn't end after a round is over. You should always, as far as I'm aware, act as though no matter what you do that round, even if there is antag involvement, that when the round is over your character is gonna go home and suffer the consequences of what has happened that round, even though you won't really do so icly.

[Dark1Star]

I agree to be honest, I usually cryo on rev rounds, usually because nobody does anything because nobody wants to go against the corp. At all. So really, it makes senese why most Rev rounds end up boring, as fuck.

[Chada1]

Okay so, afew things right off the bat, your statements here contradict almost all of the feedback I've had (And seen) with the new changes. Except the confusion part. Reverting back to revolutionary/loyalist won't fix this. Here's why:

1. When they were named Loyalists/Revolutionaries, it lead to two things, the Loyalists recruiting in broad daylight with no care in the world, including the Captain/HoS and most of the Command Staff, and then the Revolutionaries not being able to recruit in public at all. Then they would get shut down violently and without a fighting chance at all. This is because the 'Loyalists' as a name makes them seem to be For NanoTrasen, and is instantly less suspicious to Security or anyone. When you see 'You're invited to the Loyalists!' you don't think 'This corrupt book club is trying to turn me against NanoTrasen regulations!' you think 'This bookclub is trying to uphold NanoTrasen regulations!' And when you see 'You're invited to the Revolutionaries!' you don't think 'They're fighting for what's right' you think 'They're trying to cause chaos and go against NanoTrasen regulations!', this puts them on uneven ground from the absolute start. 
2. If they were reverted back to the old names, the flavor would cause people to really do the same thing except worse. I haven't actually seen a big fuss on the Discord recently, it all stopped around the time that I reworked the mode to the way it is. The main issue rn is that people aren't doing what I intended with the mode (Which is in the antagonist info provided to them), the contenders are meant to contend with the fellowship, the fellowship is meant to create the gimmick, and the contenders just oppose it, some say it works extremely well, others are saying it doesn't.

Now, REMOVING Revolutionary, this part gets more nuanced but still I don't think it's really something we should consider.

1. Removing revolutionary would lead to different modes being selected more often than not. But at the cost of literally our shrinking gamemode base. We removed Malf and removing Rev right after isn't going to help the repetition of other modes.

Instead of removing Rev, I'd suggest you post here in my feedback thread for the mode and help me find ways to make it more exciting/improve the names/etc.

One thing that'd help right off the bat is if the wiki had their pages updated, which they aren't rn. Reverting tho will only make the mode worse, it won't improve it. This was a problem before but 10x worse.

[Alberyk]

Voting for dismissal if it is about removing rev. I am against removing rev. People have tried insane revolts against bigger odds irl/in fiction/in lore/whever you prefer and have failed/succeeded. While the situations may be outlandish, I feel that just saying yes and doing some improv might create more interesting situations. In fact, rev is probably one of the best gamemodes for a heavy rp server, since it relies on a narrative more than others. There is enough reason, in our setting, for people to do stuff/revolt/protest in the station.

[VVipEdout]

21 minutes ago, armrha said:

I was under the impression that rev rounds aren't canon, so what Odin would do or how it would affect your career seem completely irrelevant; none of it counts for anything in your canon character history. Is that wrong?

This falls under metagaming rules, iirc. All roundtypes are meant to be roleplayed the same.

Rev is a pain, though. Nobody wants to go through the millionth wage cut gimmick or Racial Tensions Episode 6669 again. The few times something mildly interesting does happen it more often than not falls flat because of a lack of engagement and/or not enough coordination, even if the players themselves are good.

Malf dead is one of the best things we've done, that said. No reason rev would be different.

[Hepatica]

I don't think it should be dismissed, the entire point isn't removing rev, it's to have a discussion on it and how others feel about it and the points I have posted.

[Chada1]

2 minutes ago, Hepatica said:

I don't think it should be dismissed, the entire point isn't removing rev, it's to have a discussion on it and how others feel about it and the points I have posted.

I really think it'd be better posted in my feedback thread tho. Where I can use it to improve the mode, really, go here:

[Chada1]

One idea that sprung to mind, is I could make both teams start with a Command member head by default (If one is available to assign) which might help rounds get off the ground.

[Alberyk]

25 minutes ago, Hepatica said:

I don't think it should be dismissed, the entire point isn't removing rev, it's to have a discussion on it and how others feel about it and the points I have posted.

2 of 3 proposed solutions are to remove rev. Also, a dismissal does not meant that the discussion is to stop, it means that the dev team is not really willing to implement that is being suggested.

Other point:

Revs are meant to be uncommon situation, your character is not really expected to happen the same as every day, because it is not a everyday situation.

[Hepatica]

5 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

One idea that sprung to mind, is I could make both teams start with a Command member head by default (If one is available to assign) which might help rounds get off the ground.

I do like that idea, the only issue I see being rounds where we have no command or only starting with a single head of staff. Another thing people have mentioned is rev implants, which could be RP'd out in various ways and I do like the idea of, since I believe loyalists have implants as well

[Chada1]

1 minute ago, Hepatica said:

I do like that idea, the only issue I see being rounds where we have no command or only starting with a single head of staff. Another thing people have mentioned is rev implants, which could be RP'd out in various ways and I do like the idea of, since I believe loyalists have implants as well

Not anymore, nop. Mindshields prevent you from joining both teams rn. This is mostly to prevent the HoS/Captain from joining one team and stomping the other (Like used to happen)

We're trying to create a mix here where both teams have a chance and neither is completely eliminated nearly every rev round. But at the same time as having the round have stuff happen. So if you have any ideas seriously post them in my thread.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Chada1

[ImmortalRedshirt]

If Rev isn't removed, there's still the aforementioned issue of joining such a revolution not making sense within the context of having a consistent and reasonable character. The only way to circumvent this is by no longer making the character consistent and reasonable, and at that point, you can only do that with orbital handheld mind control lasers lightbulbs. It works on other servers, but is it HRP?

I don't know, actually.

[Chada1]

It isn't inconsistent and unreasonable to join the rev teams. The idea that it is is just plain wrong, you aren't forced to play a character that is absolutely loyal to NanoTrasen under the 'Believable character' rules.

You can play a character who works for NanoTrasen out of necessity since it's just one of the best companies in the region for income

You can play a character who works for NanoTrasen because it offers really good college subsidies and it's p. much your only shot of affording it, even tho you hate what it did to your hometown.

You can play a character who isn't even working for NanoTrasen but is contracted by it, and see the benefit in helping these NanoTrasen employees in their cause, if only to injure this rival megacorp.

[Snakebittenn]

You can easily play a consistent character who has enough moral backbone to stand against justice/injustice/whatever. Again, people have done more in real life against certain causes.

[Zundy]

I just join in gimmicks as best I can regardless of my character to keep the round going, is this wrong? I don't see why we can't just do that?

[Chada1]

1 minute ago, Zundy said:

I just join in gimmicks as best I can regardless of my character to keep the round going, is this wrong? I don't see why we can't just do that?

No, just do what zundy do, you can always improv a reason that fits your character

Edited August 3, 2020 by Chada1

[Karhast]

This thread coincides with the end of a revolution round some thirty minutes before I started typing this, so. Hi. I played Klazyn Oslek that round, head fellow. The round proceeded as follows, and it is a good average for how these rounds tend to go:

1. The other head said he was ahelping to be removed entirely. I was on my own.

2. I approached many people with the intent to have them join. I used the radio message for some perfectly good Stalinist old revolutionary fervor.

3. I converted one guy. One. Out of very, very, very many.

4. Round's almost over so I try to do something, anything, to shake things up. I decide to redistribute station funds among the people around

5. I get caught by the AI and security dunks on me

Point 3 is where things go wrong: nobody goes along with revolutions. Ever. It doesn't happen. In the very best case scenario, some people who have long since befriended one another band up and RP a bit. In the ordinary scenario, some revs try to do tacky shit and go nowhere. Worst case scenario, which is still more common than the first, everyone gives up and you get glorified extended. Yay.

The kicker is, I don't even know why this happens. If the round type is secret, there's surely people out there who acknowledge it and would want to get involved, but.. Nope. The sturdiest of brick walls, the most painful of pulled teeth, pissing into the strongest of winds - revolution. Synonyms all.

My own preferred fix would be one not even on the list, and it'd be to give the revolutionaries a (limited) supply of forced conversions. Anything, really, to get past that initial hurdle. As it is, revolutions fail nine times out of ten through sheer apathy, and it doesn't even have cult constructs for people who don't get the message. I don't enjoy it much, and I really wish things were different than they are.

[Chada1]

1 minute ago, Karhast said:

...

One idea I'm working considering rn, is making a Command member always spawn in both teams (If they're available to assign) with priority to the Fellowship. I'm hoping that helps, if you get anymore ideas please lemme know.

The forced conversations are an option but I'm a bit hesitant, maybe I could up the number of Crew initially selected and have it scale up depending on players?

[Karhast]

Just now, Chada1 said:

One idea I'm working considering rn, is making a Command member always spawn in both teams (If they're available to assign) with priority to the Fellowship. I'm hoping that helps, if you get anymore ideas please lemme know.

I don't think command crew spawning is going to help too much. How would you reckon it'd get people to join up with the tide more?

3 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

The forced conversations are an option but I'm a bit hesitant

Why? It works for cults.

3 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

maybe I could up the number of Crew initially selected and have it scale up depending on players?

So, fun story, that rev round earlier wasn't meant to be rev. It was going to be cult, not enough people were available, then it went for rev. And then the other guy cryo'd, leaving me all alone as the sole antag for it. If so few people are willing to Be Cool, there's a problem with the gamemode, not with the initial starting amount(though I would appreciate more for sure.)

[Chada1]

5 minutes ago, Karhast said:

I don't think command crew spawning is going to help too much. How would you reckon it'd get people to join up with the tide more?

Why? It works for cults.

So, fun story, that rev round earlier wasn't meant to be rev. It was going to be cult, not enough people were available, then it went for rev. And then the other guy cryo'd, leaving me all alone as the sole antag for it. If so few people are willing to Be Cool, there's a problem with the gamemode, not with the initial starting amount(though I would appreciate more for sure.)

People in general tend to side with teams if they have some amount of authority I'd think, (This was the problem with Loyalist before the rework) and so if one has a Command head, those under the Command member would be more likely to side with that team. It's a theory that's worth testing.

As for it working with cult, that's also a thing people absolutely hate about that gamemode.

And it's not a problem with the gamemode if so few people are willing to 'Be Cool', so much as a problem with the people not willing to 'Be Cool', that's the root cause here, so I'm thinking if we just skip the conversion phase and try to get stable numbers in each of the teams (If possible) that part may be solved and better than forced conversion.

It could lead to it getting off the ground enough for other people to start joining the teams.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Chada1

[Zundy]

Would having pre-set team objectives be good? Maybe those pre-sets come with equipment? You could have the choice of choosing them or "custom" which is whatever special gimmick. Not sure how much work that'd be.

[Chada1]

Just now, Zundy said:

Would having pre-set team objectives be good? Maybe those pre-sets come with equipment? You could have the choice of choosing them or "custom" which is whatever special gimmick. Not sure how much work that'd be.

It could be an option, but if I did it that way I'd really like to set it so each head of each team can have their own agenda (Their own objective) and so they'd gather their own branch of the team to achieve it

[Karhast]

1 minute ago, Chada1 said:

People in general tend to side with teams if they have some amount of authority I'd think, (This was the problem with Loyalist before the rework) and so if one has a Command head, those under the Command member would be more likely to side with that team. It's a theory that's worth testing.

I don't think authority is the problem - if it were, all you need to do is make an announcement which says 'command Super Duper Lost Its Authority, Guys.' It's been done, doesn't work. I think people hate to lose, that they aren't stupid, and that they know the odds. Your dumb revolution is going up against the department which has both the most people and the most guns the majority of shifts, a bunch of people who mostly main security, communicate better than you do, have more coherence, experience, and are just going to do a better job. A security crew backed by a force of apathetics who 'aren't technically security but maaaan these are my friends and why do you have guns ' and so forth. The odds are very much against you.

So, I'd be interested for me to be proven wrong, but I don't think it's a lack of authority that's the issue.

6 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

As for it working with cult, that's also a thing people absolutely hate about that gamemode.

Tough. Vote extended if you don't want to have a blood cult sweep across the station; few enough players vote that it's really, really, really easy to sway it with even three to five people.

7 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

And it's not a problem with the gamemode if so few people are willing to 'Be Cool', so much as a problem with the people not willing to 'Be Cool', that's the root cause here, so I'm thinking if we just skip the conversion phase and try to get stable numbers in each of the teams (If possible) that part may be solved and better than forced conversion.

If so few people are willing to step up for a gamemode, that even those drafted into it cryo instantly, that nobody at all is willing to join the revolution, the gamemode absolutely has a problem. Or the playerbase does, but telling people they're having fun wrong makes for poor game design anyhow.