An alternative to the OAS

[Regas]

As an alternative to the OAS, something recently discussed as both useful and missed for it's value in attracting new players, could we consider having one or more servers open to the community with level caps (say level two or three) until a formal player app is submitted and approved?

[hollyfant]

There will of course be a few morons running amok, but overall I do think this is the way to go.

I'd ban "unapproved" players from engaging in CvC though, while also granting them immunity from it.

[dergon darkhelm]

There will of course be a few morons running amok, but overall I do think this is the way to go.

I'd ban "unapproved" players from engaging in CvC though, while also granting them immunity from it.

Agree -- Of the ideas floated thus far I think this has the greatest likely to actually serve to increase the number of players in ALFA.

[thinkpig]

I agree as well. I think we should open all servers, at the same time, for a three day period once a month. That gives players the chance to get a look at multiple servers, I don't think there's anyone else running three live servers. The scope of our content is part of its appeal. Why spend the time and resources setting up an OAS when we could just open up a few days a month? I think it at least deserves a trial run.

[Regas]

I certainly get where you're coming from with a limited time approach with the open pass. I think we should consider leaving at least one server open all the time, my thinking being the game spy list is by far our best advertisement, do we really want to limit it to 10% of the time? If Crum is game to test this out on Silvy, I think the server is under used and has some great static content, it is also fairly finished but does lack dm coverage.

[Castano]

I think this is a great idea...other games have "beginner areas" where you can learn the ropes and test out if you like it or not.

[Sandermann]

Thinking of this from an enforcement point of view, the easiest way is to open a portion of a server, or of all servers. Personally i'd like to control access by looking for the players GSID and referencing this against a list of members, there by only allowing members to leave the "start" area.

As far as changing the rules for visitors, such as barring them from CvC, absolutely no. What would be the point of allowing open access to an area of a server in order to expose a new potential member to ALFA but having a separate set of rules for them. If i'm asessing a member, then their reaction to CvC would be paramount in deciding if they are ALFA material or not.

[ElCadaver]

If it can be done from a scripting point iof view, seems like a good idea. Just as long as you don't get a hoarde of level threes dragging down your high level champion and beating him unconscious so they can roleplay stealing his stuff... Would definately get people in game.

If we did that, someone should make a big song and dance about it on as many websites as possible, and have a big lead up to it. Random loot additions to low level spawns for the first two weeks should bring in just the kind of nobles we are looking for...

[Castano]

trust me El Cadaver is right...do not allow them to CvC....what do we say to the member who lost their PC to a hoard of newb griefers? Do we tech rez him? what if the member falsely claims griefing?...this is a bad road to go down if you do not limit what the probationary members can do. There are better ways of filtering out people than testing whether they act IC in CvC situations...you look at their overall RP, whether they are only RPing because it is "expected" here and they want to "win" the game, or whether they are here to develop a fully rounded PC concept.

I dislike the "starting area" thing also..it shoudl be a whole server..otherwise you will see a barrier develop where the newbs hang in "starter town" and the members avoid it like the plague.

[Rotku]

From experience in the OAS, CvC was about as common as it was in ALFA Live. In fact, I'd say back when the OAS was up, I probably came across more CvCs in Live than there... now that might be different though. The only exception is when you got some nutter who just went around killing everyone for a laugh - but trust me when I say they were a real big exception and far from the norm. I think I had to deal with maybe two over the time I spent on the OAS.

[Castano]

i hear you rotku..not worried about a flood of nutters..but with a totally open server..i don't want to have to clean up after them either.

[Thangorn]

if i am in chat and you ask me to jump in and DM kill and ban a njub who is wrecking the game for people... Give me the power, I will do it and happily so. Griefers are in the minority in my experience and I will happily remove them if it is required.

I would like to see more people enjoying ALFA. If we open up a server to a limited level, remove CVC from non-members and give DMs special powers to say give just one warning before banning the s**t out of non-members who mess up, I'd be cool with that as a DM/buildery type person/experienced playa.

[Rotku]

Use to have a function on the DM Wand to boot people. That was useful on the odd occasion. Not sure if it's there in NWN2.

[Sandermann]

you can kick someone as a DM.

I dont think a whole server is policeable, I also think a visitor should be able to see more of what we have to offer. Anyway Castano if your logic is correct about a barrier developing within a server then that would be true of the whole server that was open as well.

CvC can be controled in IC ways within town, scripted ones not just DM oversight, without hassle. I don't think it should be mandatory for a HDM to open a portion of their server but I don't see why it shouldn't be possible.

[Rotku]

Worse comes to worse and everything falls to pieces, we can always back step and put a password up again.