Business And Economy Archive
Thread: A Replacement for BF. A Call for a Draw
It is strange. I thought this was a forum about career building, forging economic interdependence, and the galactic economic issues.
But if we'd rather have this forum reserved for whining about prices, nerfs, and such, then obviously a post that does the above has no place here.
First of all, let me start with an apology, as this is my first post. I have only been playing SWG for just over a month. The experience has been enjoyable (immersing into a Star Wars environment) and frustrating (some very weak mechanics.) That aside, I don’t wish to show too much ignorance of the system, but this thread has really sparked some interest for me.
One of the beauties of this game is all the professions that can be played. Currently, I am taking the Shipwright path and have enjoyed it a fair amount. I am also a Master Rifleman, and Level 2 Pilot. I would hate to see professions such as entertainers disappear from the game, as a result of having no real purpose. Personally, I think there should be greater specialization and even more professions available. But, that is another topic.
PoetDancer wrote a very compelling post. I believe every profession in the game should have the ability to stand on its own, by offering unique skills. From my perspective as a non-entertainer, the main reason I have for seeing an entertainer, is that of removing Battle Fatigue. Even as a pilot and rifleman I will have no reason to ever go see an entertainer once the fatigue aspect is removed. As valuable as Inspiration is, I only get it when recouping from my fatigue. An extra 10% experience really isn’t worth the effort of tracking someone down (and tipping.) I am much better off just running one more mission.
I hope some replacement for the system is added back into the game. My belief is that the even the existing model for ?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
ffice:smarttags" />Battle isn’t strong enough. I think Fatigue should subtract from your Mental, just as wounds take from your Health. Get a little fatigue and all kinds of people will be running to entertainers for a little boost. But I think sleeping on a bed in your house (give the beds a purpose too … they feel lonely) should help recover fatigue as well. Seeing an Entertainer is just a faster way of making it happen. Then the idea of having a morale officer in a party could become quite attractive.
Not only would such a change keep entertainers busy with clients, but it would give reason for hunting parties to hire one on. Grinding can take some time, and if you are getting mentally worn out doing it, you will want someone close that can counter its effects. Set up a camp, let them entertain you and take away the weariness of your battles.
I would even go as far as to say it should be applicable in ALL aspects of the game. Crafters should earn ‘Mental fatigue’ for crafting … doctors for healing … combatants for fighting … and even entertainers for entertaining. Perhaps the only exception would be Jedi (since they never seem to like to be entertained anyway.)
Anyway, that is my ‘two credits’. I hope, like those that have already posted to this thread, that we see a replacement that would give the entertainment profession some viability, and encourage people to play it.
Ultimately, I am for fatigue in some form or variant. It exists in the real world, and is a great motivator of economies. I would be a shame not to have it in this universe as well.
I don’t wish to play just another fighting game.
-Marcolo
Thank you dear. Core systemsis concernedwith the universal "building blocks" of the game: interfaces, chat modes, etc. But what we are discussing here is a suitable draw and role within the economic life of the servers.
I have taken great interest in this forum over the last few months. And indeed, my last few posts on the economic concerns of the cantina professions were generally well received, and I was able to give a new, insiders perspective that some here might not otherwise have.
As far as the interface suggestion, Flatfingers, here is my concern.
Just because something is actively given, doesn't mean it encourages "active play." And when I mean active play, I mean play that fosters an immersive environment, rewards amusement, and provides a platform for creativity and depth.
Starport buffing doctrors in the days before the CU had to actively give their commands. But did this encourage them to create an immersive environment? Or did it just encourage them to set a macro, spam their price and stats, put the screen on minimize, and maximize the screen just long enough to take the credits, press a button, and put the screen on minimize again?
You see, my problem is that these professions can never truly give the mechanics in an active way. The patron actually receives the mechanics by /watching or /listening. The best we can ever have is a /setperform. But really. What real incentive is there to even attend our characters once we click on the interface, and take the credits for giving the command? At that point, we aren't even paid for dancing, playing music, or even entertaining. We are only paid for clicking on the interface.
Which begs the question of, "if the entertainer only cares about being paid by clicking on the interface, and the patron only is willing to pay for receiving the active command, then why should the entertainer even be required to perform after they issue the command, and why should the patron even be required to sit through the performance after the command is issued?"
At that point, even playing the notes or dancing the stepsbecomes apointless waste of time that neither the patrons, nor many entertainers even want to be bothered with. Because if the only real reason the entertainer is playing is to click on the interface, and the only real reason the patron is even there is to click on an interface, then why not just dispense with the need to /listen, /watch, and sit through a performance, if only just for the sake of efficiency, economy, and common sense?
I would rather have the "active command" be /startmusic, or /startdance, and the control be /stopmusic, or /stopdance. It simply makes more sense this way. And the problem now, as I see it, is that we have no real reason to /stopmusic, or /stopdance.
So how do we correct this?
Give entertainers a reason to stop performing, because they will want to start performing in another venue. And if we see entertainers in the real world, this is how it is in truth. Real celebrities are always on the go. They do not have time to "sit around and wait for someone to need a show." They are too busy booking new venues, going on tour, travelling to new locations, setting up, and actually performing to wait around. We need some way to simulate this in the game, and give us an active game that really, truly resembles showbusiness.
To respond to Flatfingers:
First off, thanks for the continued response. I love hearing new ideas, and ideas expanded upon.
Entertainers in Hunting Parties
But maybe there's a good Star Wars-y way to let entertainers get out of the house from time to time without painting bullseyes on their backs.
I agree. I mean it doesn't stop them from going multi-profession and picking up a rifle. There are plenty of points for entertainers to use for combat skills.
But I would say this is where the entertainer has to have a little faith. Hopefully by sticking with the group (even if they are not officially part of the group), the time will come when they (the group)sets up camp and the entertainer can dance for tips. Of course, with the whole contract idea it could be much more complex than that.
"Keep your distance. But don't LOOK like you are keeping your distance" - Han Solo - Return of the Jedi
Added Effectiveness of Entertainment Structures to Entertainers
Exactly -- that's how I was thinking of this, too. Rather than merely applying some bonus for entertaining in a cantina/theater/arena/camp or on a yacht, why not give entertainers active features that encourage them to entertain there (because it's more fun)? Maybe the bartenders give free drinks every so often as long as the music's playing....
Sounds good to me. The game could even have cantinas with entertainment rooms. This gets back into the contract idea. Contract with an entertainer to run a room, and throw a cover charge to get into the room. That room has bonuses to their entertaining.
"What do you say, Milt - 25% of the house take, sound alright?" - Wyatt Earp - Tombstone
Swoop/Pod races ... I really like that one. (Who doesn't want cheerleaders?)
I could go for this. It's a little sad that swoop races are such solitary events. What if having cheerlea- I mean, entertainers doing their thing near the starting point could give all racers a slight speed boost? (Heh.)
This would be another opportunity for economic advantage, by the way: spectators == tips!
Great expansion of the idea. Or slightly modified, the idea of a racer hiring on entertainers to keep them boosted during the race. Of course, they should have a pit crew on tap too. Expensive thing, races are !
Contracts with theatres/cantinas. Bring in a headlinerfor certain hours.
Hmm. Define "headliner." If you dare.
I would define a "headliner" as anyone who entertains exclusively in an area during some time period. Right now its not possible, since the cantinas are basically giant mosh pits. But, should the designers feel inclined to develop rooms or buildings where administratively a single player (or group of players) can be given the right to entertain and no others can ... you have "headliners"
I know .. big jump there from my "Bring in a headliner entertainer for certain hours."
Contracts - In General
As for contracts... that's an intriguing idea. It's actually something we can do now in an informal way, but it would be fun to be able to create a more formal contract to provide entertainment services as a long-term business relationship.
May I interest you in a formal contract system I designed? /evilgrin (People are screaming at you, "Run! Run for your life!" I've only been pushing this idea for nearly two years now....)
Player Contracts: A Design Document
Player Contracts: The Short Version
I've been looking these links over. Very detailed and well thought out. I really like the idea, and it would be fun to see it implemented. I may make comments on contract details, but if I do, I will do it on one of those threads.
Arenas for Gladiatorial combat. (More cheerleaders!)
This is something we've been tossing back and forth for a while now. (Arenas, that is, not cheerleaders.) It's an idea that everyone seems to like; we just need to figure out the right feature set.
Reicine came up with a good set of suggestions recently for what he called the Geonosian Arenas. You might find something you like there.
I will take a look at this. You gave me a lot to read already! But the name sounds intriguing and likely right on mark with what I was thinking.
Concerts
Another good idea that needs to have some features worked out. Any ideas?
This would be the same idea as what I said above in "Headliner" and discussed concerning covercharged rooms, but perhaps a larger scale. A theatre might work. Sell tickets to get in, and set the admin rights for the building to allow a specific entertainer to entertain for a period of time (say 30 minutes.) A good entertainer might be able to script out a great show that would be enjoyable to watch, while still giving you buffs.
As the owner of the theatre, you make a little on the side too for the show. Gotta like that. Infact, there is a whole new profession, for you, Showman or Manager. Put together shows, lease buildings, advertise, sell tickets! It might be just a hybrid of a standard Businessman, but allows the player to give entertainment bonuses to races or buildings they schedule concerts/plays/operas/shows in.
The ability for entertainers with creature handling to do circus tricks.
What's interesting about this isn't the specific suggestion (although it's a cool idea), but rather the deeper notion that certain abilities would only be available by having certain mixtures of cross-profession skills.
On the positive side, this could significantly extend the interest level in trying different professions, which is something the developers have always been interested in promoting. (It is still one of the key unique features of SWG compared to other MMOGs... so far.)
On the negative side, think about how many new abilities you'd have to come up with if you were to be "fair" to everyone so that every possible combination of two skills offered a special cross-profession ability. Assuming 34 professions, that's 561 new abilities (33 + 32 + ...) that would have to be imagined and implemented. Ouch.
Is there some other way this could be done fairly without combinatorial overload?
Wow .. tough question! You know its easy to come up with ideas .. don't ask me to think about them ... lol.
Actually, this is going off topic, but I think there should be an additional level of specialization for each profession. As a Shipwright I would love have the ability to specialize in just Engines, above and beyound what a Master Shipwright could do. Perhaps points that can only be used for specialization after you have become Master, and only in that area.
You could expand that to cover Specialized professions. I don't think you need to have every combination out there. I think its a bitover-the-top for a playerto assume that everything can be cross-trained with everything else. But having certain specialized professions, that are cross professions only would be cool, and add to the game. Essentially create more Hybrid professions.
-Marcolo
PoetDancer, I believe we're in general agreement here.
I think this thread would be appropriate in Core Systems because we're discussing how entertaining (which I certainly think of as "core" to SWG!) fits into SWG with respect to the other core playstyles. But as I said, I think we're also describing the economic motivators for these interactions, which means it's an appropriate thread for this board as well.
That said, I definitely agree with you that "active" really ought to mean something. If you think Doctors had it bad, consider Merchants -- their skills consist of things like creating and dressing vendors, listing objects for sale on those vendors, advertising those vendors on the Planetary Map, and paying less to maintain vendors, houses, harvesters and factories. Unless you count the painful tedium of retyping ad copy for thousands of items when relisting them, Merchants have no "active" skills... and none of them require direct interaction with other players at all!
Merchants actually get the bulk of their XP simply from operating vendors, even while offline. Why? Because they have no active skills that can be rewarded with XP.
(To be fair, there's a sense in which this is a Good Thing: No active skills means that you can't really "grind" Merchant. Because you get XP when other people visit your shop and view your vendor, it's possible to set up an assembly line of other players who'll grind your XP for you in a few days, but at least the Merchant doesn't have to do it.)
So when I suggest that entertainers ought to have "active" skills, that's the kind of thing that motivates my opinions. If someone's paying real money to play SWG, then the things the game allows them to do ought to be interesting and rewarding, and those benefits ought to accrue from conscious, ongoing participation in the game world. They ought to be fun for the player doing them as well as for those with whom that player interacts.
A good example of truly active content would be the image design process. When an ID works with a customer, there's real-time, back and forth negotiation. The ID's primary ability is active.
Maybe there's a clue there for how other professions should work with each other, and perhaps even with some parts of the game world....
--Flatfingers
bluejanus wrote:
Sure general interdependence is important, but posting off topic threads should be frowned up as much as we frown WTB/WTS threads here. You've mentioned economic relationships involving entertainers, but the bulk of the conversation has been with entertainer dynamics which has nothing to do with this forum. I don't bring in my specific architect concerns in this forum, because architect concerns belong in the architect professional forum. I mention architect concerns in regards to general economic issues, not talk about architect issues and mention economic issues. Entertainers should be treated no differently..
If you want to talk with other Architects for their particular take on some economic issue, then yes, doing it in the Architect forum is appropriate.
But what about when what you're really looking for is information from non-Architects on an economic issuethat involvesArchitects?
At that point it's no longer an Architect-primary, economy-secondary issue -- it's an economy-primary, Architect-secondary issue, and as such, appropriate for the Business and Economy forum.
I don't disagree that some of the conversation has been about entertainer dynamics, but I also think that it's been worthwhile to explore that aspect of being an entertainer -- if you don't know what ents can do, how are you supposed to know how much they should charge for doing it?
"Off-topic" is a judgement call. Certainly there are messages (like WTB/WTS stuff, that's a very good example) that clearly go outsideany gray area, and politelyreferring the postersof such messages to a more appropriate board is desirable. Messages that are not so clearly outside the gray area, however... I'm inclined to give those some leeway. As long as we're aware of the board's focus and try to come back to it, some amount of looseness in discussiondoes little harm, and may in fact illuminate some usefulpoints that might otherwise not have found a place to be expressed at all.
So it seems to me, anyway, but then I'm not the Business and Economy Correspondent. 
--Flatfingers
Flatfingers wrote:The general interdependence of professions is more important than economic interdependence. So given the nature of this thread so far,I don't disagree thatit might be better offin Core Systems.
On the other hand, we have been discussing economic interdependence between ents and other players as part of this thread, so I'd say the ThreadStormtroopers don't need to be called injust yet....
--Flatfingers
Sure general interdependence is important, but posting off topic threads should be frowned up as much as we frown WTB/WTS threads here. You've mentioned economic relationships involving entertainers, but the bulk of the conversation has been with entertainer dynamics which has nothing to do with this forum. I don't bring in my specific architect concerns in this forum, because architect concerns belong in the architect professional forum. I mention architect concerns in regards to general economic issues, not talk about architect issues and mention economic issues. Entertainers should be treated no differently..
already working on this issue please read and leave feedback. more good feedback = a possible change.
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=economy&message.id=10535