welcome to calamity! we are an au pokemon site based in hoenn. we do not have canons so you can pick them as your fcs! we have a short one hundred word word count. and you get to also pick your own starter! calamity is going to focus on providing users with a good and stable plot line to follow. this helps each character progress and some might even have a play in affecting the plot! we hope you enjoy your time here and if you have any questions don't be afraid to ask.
hey guys! we've finally hit our three month mark! let's stay strong. the activity check and gala have ended, if your character has been archived and you need them back please pm one of the admins! unfortunately, noods has steped down from his admin position. make sure you say your goodbyes here!
(
JUNE 18TH, 2015
)
hello calamity! we're nearing the two months mark in a few weeks. how time flies! right now we have two things going on that need your participation. the first is an activity check! it is impotant that you check in so you don't lose your face claim. the second is the otm nomiations! we're doing it a bit different than last time. so please submit your nominations in. a vote thread will be up in the next few days. there will also be a formal event coming very soon, so keep your eye out for that. keep being cool!
we're currently about to host calamity's first contest in slatepor. trainers are flocking to the city to see, the city's been trying to get good pr since the gala, and it seems to be working! they're asking for both coordinators and volunteer judges to sign up.
CALAMITY is a roleplaying forum inspired by the popular franchise POKEMON, which does not belong to us. the skin was crafted by PHARAOH LEAP of GANGNAM STYLE. special thanks to SPIRAL for contributing ideas! all art on the forum does not belong to us unless stated otherwise, while all written works belong to the members who posted them. DO NOT TAKE ANYTHING that is not yours, please. thank you.
Post by Asher Grimvald on Aug 1, 2015 20:13:33 GMT
So the way things are going with the way the system is set up for the Wild Threads, I want to make a suggestion that is beneficial to both the mods and the role-player that will make it more quicker and everyone more happier.
So, mods have become busy as of late with IRL things, and that's completely understandable. But before my leave of absence sometime in June or May? I wasn't quite fond of the way things were going with the Wild Request Threads system (and by that I mean the post by post with the Mod NPC'ing the Pokemon and the PC having to wait for a response) before changes were made to the site. I had a bad experience doing my first wild thread request when I joined and it LITERALLY took two weeks for me to get a response/my Pokemon before having to send a PM to a mod on how long it took for me to get a Pokemon in my thread. I felt as though I had waited patiently enough and assumed I would at least get my Pokemon one or two days later, but two weeks? Yeah, I couldn't wait any longer honestly.
So, I suggested this once before to Cila in my PM, but I wanna see other people's thoughts on this and see if they would prefer this:
The suggesting that I am making is that rather than doing a post by post, the mods can simply just drop a Pokemon in the thread and allow the player to do a simple post on their own of catching said Pokemon in their own way. All the mods simply have to do is drop the Pokemon that was given to them by the RNG in the thread for that player, let the player narrate their way of going about catching it, and the mod simply posts CAPTURED or TRY AGAIN or whatever.
Now before you're all, "But I don't like to narrate my own posts, I prefer post by post, I hate this idea," this idea is beneficial to EVERYONE. For those who are impatient, those who aren't, and for those who are busy. Doing this, as a mod, can cause one to lose muse and get lazy in posting on their own character or even in catch threads, and if this doesn't, it saves time in having to write a post back and forth.
Another benefit is that people gain character development/experience/can form a stronger bond with their Pokemon ICly. I mean, by narrating your own post you're actually conducting character development a little bit for your character and strengthening a bond between you and your newly captured Pokemon.
Doing this can honestly save time for everyone and get things moving more quicker when doing catch threads. But then again, this is just my opinion and I'm rlly too lazy right now after just eating this pizza to continue giving more points, LOL! But I will if someone desires to argue against this idea or wants to know more on how this can benefit everyone or for whatever reason, but ye.
Give thoughts, opinions, add on suggestions.
"Why is it that the most beautiful things are entwined more deeply with death than with life?"
In my opinion, dropping the battles all together isn't fun. A simple drop and catch doesn't give me time to really write out interactions between my character and their pokemon.
While I agree (to an extent because I've only had one mod so far) that something should probably be changed in how catch threads work, I don't think dropping post by post all together would be a great idea.
I would suggest more mods but I'm still quite new so I'm not entirely sure how many staff members there are that do catch threads, npc threads, etc.
Most pkmn sites I've been to have more than a few mods so things get responded to quicker and people progress quicker. Others have had specific mods for certain types of threads and it's worked out pretty well. I would suggest something like this but I'm not entirely sure how that would work out here.
is this to completely replace the current modding system for pokémon catching? or is this just an alternative for when staff get busy/for people who decide they want it?
Maybe allow both? There could be an option to play it yourself and your pokemon only gets 1 level for winning or you could bring in a mod and get 2 levels for winning. That way you can catch pokemon fast or gain levels fast depending on which you choose.
Post by Victoria Trescott on Aug 1, 2015 20:48:03 GMT
Better to limit catching to some extent. Some people are making them back to back for each character which will obviously bog down the mods responding to each
is this to completely replace the current modding system for pokémon catching? or is this just an alternative for when staff get busy/for people who decide they want it?
Its whatever staff decides. It's only a suggestion.They have the choice to decide the outcome and if they want to completely replace it, deny it, or put it in as a alternative.
"Why is it that the most beautiful things are entwined more deeply with death than with life?"
Better to limit catching to some extent. Some people are making them back to back for each character which will obviously bog down the mods responding to each
This is true and I agree. I'd suggest two catch threads a week honestly if that's the case.
"Why is it that the most beautiful things are entwined more deeply with death than with life?"
Better to limit catching to some extent. Some people are making them back to back for each character which will obviously bog down the mods responding to each
This is true and I agree. I'd suggest two catch threads a week honestly if that's the case.
There's a limit on one wild and one NPC thread per member but quite a few people have made more than that and have more threads going on than they should. Staff were pretty lenient with it but now it's going to be adhered to more strictly. Perhaps when these people with multiple threads finish them and stick to the one wild, one npc per member rule, the requests'll thin out a bit and let staff tend to more members' requests at a time so it won't get too bogged down.
is this to completely replace the current modding system for pokémon catching? or is this just an alternative for when staff get busy/for people who decide they want it?
Its whatever staff decides. It's only a suggestion.They have the choice to decide the outcome and if they want to completely replace it, deny it, or put it in as a alternative.
i know. but ideally, if this were to be put into place what would you want it as? a full replacement or an alternative provided by the staff for those who aren't willing to wait/who prefer this method?
i'm not really experienced with pokémon rp, but i think experience with general fighting/shounen rps could apply here too? anyway, i agree with lexus's point.
limiting members to a certain amount of mod-driven threads would be a good over-all solution, but i think going one step further would also be an interesting solution to explore. why not limit catching threads to a certain word-count that's preferable but not wildly enforced? i know adding a max word count seems odd, but personally, i believe that catching pokémon really shouldn't be a complicated process. a short, straightforward battle and then you throw a pokéball. no purple prose needed. now i'm not suggesting we add a word count max to the whole site, or even battles or contests (because those require more descriptions and are far more complex than a simple pokémon battle) i'm making suggestions purely to solve the problem of bogged down staff and catching threads that can't be fulfilled as quickly as they're made.
rasta also makes a good point. if this system is implemented, i think it should remain completely optional. because though this system is efficient and beneficial, not everyone likes the idea of self-narration and those who aren't into it shouldn't be forced into it.
i think i may have had more to say, but i'm currently distracted by TV and poutine. sorry.
Post by Dmitri Khvostov on Aug 1, 2015 22:04:53 GMT
The only real reason not to do this is if, well, Staff don't find their job as interesting or enjoyable because now they're basically a (wo)man fulfilling a machine's job, i.e. randomly generating numbers to determine outcomes. This does have its minor cons, but none of them seem to factor in as influentially as the pros.
If this was all staff was necessitated to do, bottom line, with an optional post-by-post order or rather them just dropping pokemon, it would allow the system to feel more automated (fluid, single-component system) and less mechanical (multi-component, stuttering system) in exchange. A thread would move fluidly according to a player's time investment (much like ordinary wild hunts,) and not based on multiple peoples' time investments, which gets wonky sometimes and its out of our control. Unless we provide an alternative, such as this.
The downsides? Really, only if you're going to get picky over who can get more wild threads in during a week, will anybody really ever come up with an argument. But if you're catching tons of pokemon, so what? You're the one who has to figure out paying for pokeballs, raising them or trading them off.
If anything it would increase the amount of potential trades available, forcing pokemon to change between hands that usually never touched. It could be a beautiful thing, seeing everyone trading and interacting with each other instead of the generally snarky remarks we've heard and (myself included) spoken ourselves while we all huddle in our own corners and try to grind our pokemon to be 'da mastah of pokemonz.'
Plus, it would mean a whole lot more being at ease while being Staff. Sure it might not feel as fun, but you're still spawning the pokemon. You're the one getting people hype and making it worthwhile to catch 'em all. Additionally, staff being inactive won't delay a wild nearly as long. Because even at this point it's simple to just pop into someone else's thread, spawn another pokemon in their absence, and let the member finish. What was otherwise a post-by-post sequence morphed into the free form version to avoid getting held back by someone else's time constraints just for developing the content, let alone finalizing it.I think some people confused the spawn method with being just a shorter version of the ordinary method. It would be up to the player to provide the filler, which would hopefully be less than the normal.
I think the ideal is that, because the encounter is pretty much defaulting to the trainer to start with, allowing them to NPC it a bit isn't unreasonable. They just can't be allowed to determine what spawns for themselves, which is obviously why Staff is still necessary.
Having too many wilds is going to become an ever-increasing problem and honestly, it really limits character progression for those of us with multiple accounts. This method would ideally allow us to bypass the # of wilds pending restriction, or at least raise it by one, assuming this form of wild hunting is used by and large. The only problem is that, if people choose to rely on the post-by-post process more heavily despite the faster alternative, it will slow it down enough to prevent the lowering restrictions. So they would probably need to stay the same, even if many of us picked up on this new method.
But using it to see if it does make Staffing much less exhausting, and to see if we can allow for a few more wilds, doesn't seem outrageous to me. Some of us seem to think limiting wilds is necessary, but seeing as it's become increasingly more difficult to find what one wants, this is the obvious side-effect. People are going to want more wilds, or at least make the ones they have stop taking quite as long so they can get to the next one just a little bit faster. This was bound to trickle down and happen, one way or another. I believe Light's idea would be worth giving a try. What have we got to lose from this sort of change?
Post by Sylvester Blackburne on Aug 1, 2015 23:42:43 GMT
(This may seem like I didn't read a lot of what you guys said. It's because...there is a lot, and I have posts I should/will be making. I skimmed. Anyway...)
I just want to provide my two cents on the aspect of...limiting wild encounters, was it? I would be against limiting how many wilds we can do in a certain amount of time. Mostly because it may easily hinder our ability to progress our characters poke team based on...the number of times a number can be rolled for us by staff. That isn't very ideal or reassuring to hear.
I'd be more comfortable limiting wilds if/when the time came in their thread(s) that the character(s) actually decide to capture one/some of the pokemon, meaning the wild was worth the wild slot...it fulfilled it's purpose, and thus there was reason for the thread. If they caught something, the wild slot was used and it wouldn't be so bad if you counted that towards their limit. If they didn't catch something, then what was the point of the thread? There was none, really, and you shouldn't count that towards a limit.
If we don't capture anything in a wild, that kind of defeats the purpose of the thread being a wild in the first place, as that is the sole place where we are meant to capture feral poke.
It also defeats the purpose of Staff devoting their time to the thread when it wasn't going to be beneficial in the way wilds are meant to be. It just seems weird to me, when it's the part that wilds are rolled now that it may/will be a "wasted" (subjective) wild encounter from the start, all before they even really get to the RP.
Unless their wild encounter chances are re-rolled each time they prepare to spawn another pokemon? (As in each time staff spawn another poke in a wild, the do another roll to see if it can be something they wanted.) If not, then it really isn't even in their hands if a wild will ever be worth it.
It would just seem to work against itself, and against the members who are merely trying to get the common pokemon they want, since rares are no longer going to be easy to come by, and most certainly is it unlikely you'll ever get the one rare you wanted most. I would like to think we could all be capable of at least getting the commons we wanted for our team in a timely manner, unless we want to propose a system that basically substitutes the problem Light had of not getting a wild post (or not being able to post for a wild due to rules) for 2 weeks through a month by limiting the amount of wilds we can do in a given amount of time.
I understand that a lot of work is put before the Staff team, and that they are doing their best. I only wish to point out that the systems being set in place are just going to make things artificially more difficult (getting the commons you want, or ones that are worth catching to a member) by being based on RNG, and will (more than likely) promote the feeling members need to do more wilds in order to get the commons they feel are worth the pokeball. I am already given that impression.
So....Felon and Freak...you totally took this thread to another subject that should be it's own separate thread or complaint to a mod, because I honestly am SO confused on what you guys just wrote. I don't know how this turned into getting Pokemon we want or rolls, lol. This is about implementing a quicker system as an option for people who want their Pokemon faster instead of waiting for the mod to post by post with them and instead simply narrating your own outcome. Just to be clear. So. Yeah. Just wanted to say that. . . .
But yeah, I really don't have much else to say. So I'm just waiting for a mod to step in an give their input on this.
Post by Sylvester Blackburne on Aug 2, 2015 1:43:38 GMT
Okay...lemme just designate why I said this in here. While you're right that I could have made a whole new suggestions board for people to swarm, I still think this has to do with some of the things others had to say in here, so its not completely irrelevant to the discussion.
You are bringing up the fact that these wild encounters are taking time, considerably too much time, because the Staffer needs to respond in a post-by-post manner. I get that, the idea given to counter that is pretty solid. I have my own little opinion on it, though, as it feels like it would just be self-threading. Yet at the same time, it would be of help to those who just aren't getting their wilds done in what they feel is a timely manner.
My end of the discussion is the part where others said that we could limit the amount of wilds to solve this problem of your's, when that just makes another, very identical problem to the one you said you were having.
Thus, I said it here to try and point out said options would resort in a similar problem. People would be waiting to be able to request another wild after say 2 weeks or a month because we made another limit in that sense, and then would have to wait even more time after posting it up in the wild request form before a staffer got to it. ________________________________
Instead, I am just saying we shouldn't limit members because that just arouses an identical problem where people are going to be waiting to do wilds. The idea of allowing us to thread the encounter on our own after a staffer simply spawns the pokemon is still on the table, and I have nothing against it. I think it makes the wilds a little more diverse, and as you or others said, enables us to add a more personal interaction between pokemon and trainer. I did not comment on that part of it because it seems alright to me. ________________________________
Really, I am just discussing the solutions with the others in this thread who had suggested to further limit the amount of wilds we can request. It's still relative to some of the content, so I saw no reason to make a whole new thread about something being discussed in this one.
Post by Dmitri Khvostov on Aug 2, 2015 1:58:52 GMT
Every thread that ever passes through here gets warped, there's all sorts of angles to look at a discussion from... isn't that why we discuss it here? I digress.
I was trying to explain what I saw as pros/cons, what might factor into people wanting these changes versus the contrary, and how they might effect the current mold. All with the organizational skills of a single man with a spare ten or twenty minutes on his hands, typing away without so much as a spell check or proofreading.
So yeah, that being said, I can see how it doesn't make sense. But I don't believe it's so irrelevant that it can't be discussed as a correlating factor. Your change could potentially address a majority of these issues. That's why I thought to bring it up; supporting evidence to suggest we ought to do things a little differently.
So excuse me if I was all over the place, but to be precise, I was basically supporting the idea on multiple levels. For starters: It makes work easier on Staff, it also makes developing a thread more fluid for members, and it caters to the idea that wild threads could use a boost in productivity considering they just took a hit in productivity.
No, I didn't limit myself to merely discussing your idea, I allowed myself to explore how it interrelates with the rest of the site and whatever stray thought came to mind. I'm sorry if you wanted differently. ;~;
Okay...lemme just designate why I said this in here. While you're right that I could have made a whole new suggestions board for people to swarm, I still think this has to do with some of the things others had to say in here, so its not completely irrelevant to the discussion.
You are bringing up the fact that these wild encounters are taking time, considerably too much time, because the Staffer needs to respond in a post-by-post manner. I get that, the idea given to counter that is pretty solid. I have my own little opinion on it, though, as it feels like it would just be self-threading. Yet at the same time, it would be of help to those who just aren't getting their wilds done in what they feel is a timely manner.
My end of the discussion is the part where others said that we could limit the amount of wilds to solve this problem of your's, when that just makes another, very identical problem to the one you said you were having.
Thus, I said it here to try and point out said options would resort in a similar problem. People would be waiting to be able to request another wild, and then would have to wait even more time after posting it up in the wild request form before a staffer got to it. ________________________________
So really, I am more-or-less discussing the solutions with the others in this thread who had suggested to further limit the amount of wilds we can request. It's still relative to some of the content, so I saw no reason to make a whole new thread about something being discussed in this one.
So basically your problem is that it seems as though you've had encounters with rolls that weren't in your favor or that you didn't like what you have gotten, so I'm a little confused on what you're suggesting here? Because rolls are meant to be a guessing game and not a "Hey, let me just give you whatever Pokemon you want." I'm probably not seeing what your input is clearly enough, so maybe it's me. But I'm going to guess that limiting wild threads is not in your favor b/c you may get a Pokemon not worth catching or of your taste so meaning basically you wasted a free wild thread slot?
I can see your point in that, but I don't think it would create a problem. Because I feel like people should focus more on plotting rather than making back to back wild catch threads. An honestly I see more of that then plotting in my opinion. But hey, that's just me.
"Why is it that the most beautiful things are entwined more deeply with death than with life?"