Dancer Archive
Thread: So how do we deal with the AFKers when they're not AFK?
PoetDancer wrote:But you can't blame entertainers, Doriana, for not wanting anything to do with this. After all, it has nothing to do what we want to be about.
Oh, no, I can and will blame entertainers for ignoring patrons. It's okay to say "I really don't like to buff," and it's okay to admit that you don't know how the system works. But it is so far from not okay to ignore people who aren't in your clique that I don't even know how to put it into words.
How can you say this has nothing to do with what we want to be about? Because I thought that we were all pretty much on the same page about being "about" helping people, be it through heals or buffs or information. Inspiration buffing is the system the devs have given me as a means to help people and I will always do my best to live up to that. If that's not what we're about, and if it's okay to ignore people instead of entertaining them, maybe I've been in the wrong profession all this time.
Message Edited by PoetDancer on 09-03-2005 03:51 PM
PoetDancer wrote:
This system doesn't reward entertaining.
You're right, this system doesn't reward entertaining. But the old system didn't reward entertaining either. It rewarded /startdance instead of rewarding /inspire. Neither of which are inherently entertaining commands.
The patrons, though, they reward entertaining. That's the way it's always been and the way it should be, regardless of the system.
Entertaining how though? If its entertaining in terms of it being a formal dinner party, then yes.
But if it is entertaining in the form of seeing a comedy troupe, or a drama on the tele, I would argue that this system is counterproductive to that end.
The patrons today don't need a "rock and roll," type attitude from musicians. They need "chamber music."
They don't need a "improv show" type attitude from dancers. They need a "prim dinner hostess."
I would agree with the 'lead by example' comment. I've given a few of the new buffs to people I don't know .. all were polite, all tipped, and all were willing to either come where I was, or wait for me to be available.
I think alot of dancers/musicians are confused with the new buffs, how they work, and who buffs which profession. This probably leads to alot of the 'awkwardness' for now. I made a summary of RedDwarf's guide (thank you RedD!!)and had one of my guilds leaders mass mail it to the guild, and I sent a copy to all my friends (the majority of entertainers I know never or seldom read the forums).
This like all other big changes is going to take awhile before we really see 'how it pans out'. I can live with these buffs, although the auto-debuffing is bad, it hurts musicians especially.
Idance (and play music)to 'perform' and have fun, and to RP and enjoy. But ...I never mind buffing anyone who asks nicely...however... if I don't want to, then I simply tell them 'no'. I guess I'm lucky, I know some really great folks on Scylla, so 'no' is rarely my response. I'd like more entertainer content, too, but I stay pretty busy... I create my own content, one way, or another. And there is always shopping if I get bored !!
Doriana wrote:
PoetDancer wrote:
But you can't blame entertainers, Doriana, for not wanting anything to do with this. After all, it has nothing to do what we want to be about.
Oh, no, I can and will blame entertainers for ignoring patrons. It's okay to say "I really don't like to buff," and it's okay to admit that you don't know how the system works. But it is so far from not okay to ignore people who aren't in your clique that I don't even know how to put it into words.
How can you say this has nothing to do with what we want to be about? Because I thought that we were all pretty much on the same page about being "about" helping people, be it through heals or buffs or information. Inspiration buffing is the system the devs have given me as a means to help people and I will always do my best to live up to that. If that's not what we're about, and if it's okay to ignore people instead of entertaining them, maybe I've been in the wrong profession all this time.
No offense but you assume this is how everyone wants to make crediuts and get paid. People become entertainers to "entertain". The reason people don't want to buff other people is because tyhis is not what the true "Entertainer" wanted. this is a money making scheme that many will have no part of. Like I said before, I am a doctor. I buff myself, my wife, and a few select friends. When people ask me to buff them I, sometimes impolitely, just tell them no.
Taking a profession considered useful by SOE standards did not make me your "Game Content". I am game content when I CHOOSE, not when you do. 
PoetDancer wrote:If we could just give it, and not have it take any time, nobody would go away from the cantina frustrated. If we could just have them take it, we wouldn't even need to hear "can u buff me" /tells, at all. And they'd be around, appreciating the things they like to see, and hear.
Actually I have to disagree here. I think the fact that our mechanics were completely passive for so long is what helped lead to this state. An ignored patron who gets his mechanics passively is still going to leave the cantina unhappy over being ignored. They'll just be not quite as angry because they left with their buff. They still won't laugh when they remember the experience next year -- "Oh yeah remember that time I went into Theed cantina and asked four times if anyone was there and everyone just kept talking around me instead of answering?? GOOD TIMES!!"
I suppose a big part of the problem is that for so long it wasn't needed to do anything other than /startdance to fullfill all the mechanical obligations of the profession that people never really needed to pay attention to the patrons.
I don't think that's a good thing. I like that the /inspire not only requires an interaction from the patron but also an interaction from the entertainer. All AFKing and buffbotting issues aside, the completely passive mechanics encouraged people to just reach a state of being instead of continually reaching for a state of being helpful.
I guess I'll just need to be patient (like I'm advocating to others, bah
) and hope that people catch on and more live ents come back. But it's so frustrating seeing what is really a case of worst fears realized.Maybe as Celestial Storm tours more it will help to stir some more interest in entertaining on Flurry
I need to start rearranging my schedule so I can make more CS gigs!Message Edited by Doriana on 09-03-2005 03:28 PM
Metricula wrote:
I also think you should be able to actively buff more than one person at a time. We shouldn't have lines.
By the way -- when this was on test center you could buff as many people at once as you wanted. I was not under the impression that it had changed.
That's why I keep saying "you only really need one dancer and one musician per cantina to meet all the buffing demand," so I'd appreciate if someone else could confirm or deny if you can inspire multiple targets concurrently.Message Edited by Doriana on 09-03-2005 03:32 PM
Funny. When I started two years ago, I had plenty of incentive to entertain...and all my mechanics were "transparent."
All the problems started happening when November 3rd, 2003 came around.
And I think that is the real problem, isn't it? The class isn't working because its not transparent. The problem is that simply getting and receiving the things is so much more of a complicated affair. It doesn't happen in the background of what we do. It defines what we do, and takes precedence over everything there.
But you can't blame entertainers, Doriana, for not wanting anything to do with this. After all, it has nothing to do what we want to be about. It has everything to do with the desires ofsomeof us here to make us be what we never wanted to be.
For the longest time, I have told dancers to be available to the public in the places they were needed. I was always shown the door, and told, "we don't want to be there," for fear of being ignored, and abused.
But at least the profession back then rewarded dance, and the attempt to be amusing (at least in terms of some things, like BF healing). It didn't reward clicking on a silly command when asked, like some trained circus animal.
Now, that's all I have. And what's more, is that performing for the public actually forces me to turn away more patrons than I can bring in. I am pointless to a weaponsmith. And I am pointless to the Tailor, when I am "servicing" a Bio Engineer.
Why couldn't we be satisfied with the transparent, and elegant system the CU gave us initially? Because of habitual AFK? Guess what. We still have it. Moreover, even if we make the "passive buff active (never minding that all our buffs are passive)," we will still have habitual AFK. Its just they'll leave the muscician and dancer on, spamming away, and simply only be "available for service" when they want to check what sounded their E-Mail buzzer.
The solution is not mechanics control, and that is why this rehashed system of the one that failed, will fail again to give us the gameplay we and our patrons need. The solution is venue control, and that is what I predict will have to happen. If dancers and musicians are required to move around, and cannot "camp" a venue, then it cannot be AFKed for very long. Because no AFK player can respond to changing conditions.
Message Edited by PoetDancer on 09-03-2005 02:51 PM
Doriana wrote:
Yes. On Live, there is no limit to the number of players we can Inspire concurrently.
Metricula wrote:
I also think you should be able to actively buff more than one person at a time. We shouldn't have lines.
By the way -- when this was on test center you could buff as many people at once as you wanted. I was not under the impression that it had changed.
That's why I keep saying "you only really need one dancer and one musician per cantina to meet all the buffing demand," so I'd appreciate if someone else could confirm or deny if you can inspire multiple targets concurrently.
Message Edited by Doriana on 09-03-2005 03:32 PM
