Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
I think the CA discussion should be shelved for now. Especially while posts like this are okay and stay up: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053714727Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
i believe our energy would be best focused inward.
Short-term index-wise... First of all...Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
Decide if we shall use/have a...
• Chronological order of TW-games (first game first - STW1) or...
• Reversed-chronological order (last game first - WaTW or possibly AtTW) of the same (this is the most commonly used).
Either we set up a poll, or a thread or something whatever were folks can declare which order they prefer (it could be here too, if folks like). We could set a dead-line for a week (or something), and the order that got the most support wins = gets applied. After that is decided (in whatever fashion)... Start applying the basic model (below) to every game and sort out the details on specific sub-fora later and continuously restructure such things later if the need arises, or clearly warranted and/or advantageous etc. etc. For now sort them in the place that they arguably belongs the most...
All off-topic stuff could for instance temporarily be sorted in 1 section during the transition (or permanently), placed wherever (yeah, I don't really care). That can be sorted out later - its clearly secondary to the actual purpose of this site, after all. And, it should not be allowed to serve as yet another excuse to delay this process any further... We have waited for too long on this as it is. Org-central/administration section can be placed first on the index (which makes solid sense). Then we go...
TW-game1 - section (individual)
-General Area & Discussion (sub-section)
-- Multiplayer (sub-fora)
--Whatever sub-fora it needs/has, max 6 (If any)
-Modding Area & Discussion
--Whatever sub-fora it needs/has, max 6 (If any)
-Hosted Mod (if any. Sub-section omitted otherwise)
--Whatever sub-fora it needs/has, max 6 (If any)
-Tech Help Area (sub-section)
--whatever sub-fora it needs, max 6 (If any)
TW-game2 - section (individual)
-General Area & Discussion (sub-section)
-- Multiplayer (sub-fora)
--Whatever sub-fora it needs/has, max 6 (If any)
-Modding Area & Discussion
--Whatever sub-fora it needs/has, max 6 (If any)
-Hosted Mod (if any. Sub-section omitted otherwise)
--Whatever sub-fora it needs/has, max 6 (If any)
-Tech Help Area
--whatever sub-fora it needs, max 6 (If any)
Etc. etc. until we run out of TW-games... (and yeah, Arena is out by default.)
Then, whatever else... Off-topic stuff or something.
Then, end of index. Essentially done...
***
Then, all the fine-tuning begins.... Now you guys can bicker about the details
of sub-fora left and right etc. Names on stuff etc. If so desired.... Besides it
will be much easier to spot such things at this stage and to discuss it....
Some general definitions that can come in handy here:
********************************************
Hosted mod = Generally active (somehow) and/or actively supported, and recognized as such. All other mods not recognized as such should be sorted differently. As in...
Functional mod = A functional and playable mod - it can be played to reasonable extents by a third party, it works - yet formally abandoned and/or unsupported. Sorted as such in a specific sub-fora as per relevant game. Or...
Incomplete mod = A non-functional and unfinished mod - it can not be played to reasonable extents by a third party, it do not work/start - formally abandoned. Sorted as such in a specific sub-fora as per relevant game.
This is to cut down the horde of abandoned (possibly functional or non-functional) stuff for especially RTW1 and MTW2 on the index, and also some stuff for other games too MTW1 and ETW etc. Sorted as per the definitions above. Relocate it all into a suitable sub-fora under the "Modding Area & Discussion"-subsection as per TW-game. Such places could be called "Playable mods archive/library" or something. "Mods cemetary/junkyard - incomplete ad non-functional mods" or some such...
That's all I can think of on this note, for the moment...
- A
I'll get to commenting this stuff eventually... I hope... In general, it wouldn't hurt if folks here could help Edyz withQuote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
additional ideas or something, or at least commenting on that and other stuff already brought to "the table" here.
Remember folks, with zero input/effort follows as much output/results - yup, zero... Every time....
- A
I may be the minority but but holy crap would a ton of forums and sub-forums for each game would annoy me to no end. I have almost all the TW games but I don't see what that would accomplish other that spread out low activity even more. To tell the truth I would come here more for the sense of community and second for the TW info. I can get a lot of that info almost anywhere in the low case I want up to date info on Rome 1 (not likely). The reason I keep fading out is because the places that were busy for me (The Backroom) were/are borderline toxic.
Oh for **** sake, another... In short... We have tried your damned way already, and it did not work.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiDamascus
It has ended up in a ******* disaster for the site. There are less people active here then ever. It has
ended up that way BECAUSE the likes of you have had it your way.
Additional text, for the interested:
There is difference between us... The things I strive for, ALLOWS you ALL your backroom and off-topic blabla while still ALSO provides me with the things I am interested in full. Everyone essentially gets what they actually want, it enables and affords that for all, as we then CAN tailor that index just as we like - you can implode all TW-sections to the stone-age if you like, its your headache... Now, the thing you strive for essentially robs me of the stuff that I am actually interested in, by dismantling it down to dysfunctional and ridiculous levels (as is also reflected in the current traffic-levels), while it ONLY provides you with what you are interested in full. See the difference? Its a huge one, and it annoys the hell out of me, that I have to explain this to the likes of you.
I will ALWAYS be against what you advocate as it simply does not afford me, or my interests, in its results - and it kills the site in general as well, as if the first circumstance was not sufficiently bad enough on its own. It don't get any better by the fact that the place is actually called "totalwar.org" and not "privatesocialclub.org". And, if it had been the latter, then you may have had a case - but as it is, you don't - as its still called "totalwar.org", and providing sections for all TW-games on such a site is natural. The fact that site-management dismantled them all in the first place - much for the likes of you - now that certainly is unnatural for a site like this one... And obviously, this site has paid accordingly for that.
- A
It's not a matter of removing the names or the games or whatever you assumed I have suggested (which was nothing by the way). I'm just stating that, in my opinion, setting up nice structures for the games and modding and whatnot will not bring in new people and will likely just showcase how dead it is. The whole point is lack of activity isn't it? I guess I just don't know why that plan does anything but make you happy. Not that I'm against making you happy but this really just seems like "You'll be happy with whatever, I'll be happy with my plan, so do my plan"
I mean I am trying to give my honest opinion here because I would assume I am the person you are trying to attract to the site. People interested in TW games? Or are you only looking for people who come to talk about TW and only TW in neatly defined boxes? I guess it's just funny that I'm reading this almost as if I'm not a TW fan and just some guy looking to chat on a random forum. I have all these games, I LIKE these games (most of them) but I don't think Rome 1 modding discussion forum is going to haul all the kids in to play.
I don't claim to have the perfect idea to fix this but if you think a forum specific revival in 2016 will bring in the views, I am going to have to disagree.
You have to see it from a first-time (or long-time, for that matter) viewer/lurker. As Ax states, we are TotalWar.Org, and as such, the primary focus should be on the games. Off-topic discussions like the Frontroom/Backroom should be a welcome diversion for those who want it. Unfortunately those roles are reversed, and the games have become just a side note, while the discussion forums are the main hangout. Might as well change the name to Louie's Bar & Grill:shrug:Quote:
I'm just stating that, in my opinion, setting up nice structures for the games and modding and whatnot will not bring in new people and will likely just showcase how dead it is.
The facts speak for themselves...when discussion focused on the games was thriving, so did the Org. As the focus on the games has faded....so has the Org.
Oh I'm not disagreeing they should be first, or the primary or whatever. But look at all those forums listed. Does each game need its own section, with like 4 subsections and each subsection gets its own subsections "if needed"? Why? There are 10 games, so that's 10 sections, each with 4 subforums and then those with subforums? This could run 50+, how does that help?Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
And I disagree that simply a shift in focus ruined the Org. Because you simply can't change the format and watch people come storming back. It's more complicated than that. I've been goofing off on forum for almost 20 years and I can tell you most of them are dying. There are enough game specific forums that have died a slow death because of several reasons. The games are old, people use things like reddit instead (that's a question, has anyone posted links here on the tw reddit?) and the fanbase who was loyal to it either stopped playing, moved elsewhere or simply has no desire to visit a forum on it.
I still have not seen a good reason for why this would bring anyone around. It seems mostly to be "Org was better then, if we go back, people will come back". There are actual ideas to be done to bring in activity but rearranging deck chairs won't stop the sinking.
I'll keep this short....
How do you know this? ...Have you tried? ...Ever visited a place called the TWC? ...Ever wondered why that site simply kills this one? ...Ever wondered why most people prefer that site to this one? The "nice structures" and "neatly defined boxes" are part of the reasons why - that's a fact. Which essentially leaves us with the option to either do roughly the same, and try to keep up (compete), or get left behind (die). And right now bubba, we are being left behind... This utterly regardless of your opinions, utterly regardless if you agree with it or not... Understand?Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiDamascus
- A
Finally! A voice of reason! Hallelujah! ...Errr, that translates roughly to totally agreed... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
- A
Oh I love TWC! But not because of the neatly defined boxes. If you think that somehow all that's missing is to copy their format, I'm just gonna chuckle. I mean I can sit here and say look at the reddit, it's popular, copy that format. This is like trying to copy the popular kids by wearing their clothes and then being shocked when it doesn't work out like you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Axalon
Why would someone who goes to TWC, or reddit or whatever come here instead? Because "Forum Configuration!" is not the big selling point.
Here is a perfect post from 2 years ago on reddit. See if you can spot anyone you recognize
https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/co..._still_active/
Old bean, the only reason why now most people prefer TWC is because it already has more people. Funnily, the biggest difference is in the Off-Topic forums. The root of the problem is why TWC surpassed .org back in 2009. Honestly I have no idea, I didn't have Internet back then and I was only starting to play the TW games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Axalon
When someone finally explains that, we can discuss how we can simulate the same thing with the opposite results.
Additionally better movements than forum restructures would be the hosting of tournaments, hotseat, multi-playing, various contests and their advertizement everywhere possible: TWC, official forums, steam, reddit.
Oh, and a wiki too. Copy-pasting the one of TWC, something that has been done, if the gossip in Shambala was true, would be a good start. Not enough, blame google for that, but if we expand it, stuff may become better.
Edit II Facebook, twitter and definitely youtube too. The last is the best, but finding a decent youtuber that has no problem working for a site and not for himself is kinda impossible.
Creating "Org content" is one of the main suggestions from my side - we need to have this big time.
This this this. To claim anything else is rank delusion.Quote:
Not that I'm against making you happy but this really just seems like "You'll be happy with whatever, I'll be happy with my plan, so do my plan"
If you want to see activity in this forum - invite people to it.
That's true only if you aren't a regular player:creep:Quote:
Why would someone who goes to TWC, or reddit or whatever come here instead? Because "Forum Configuration!" is not the big selling point.
Then what draws you to TWC?Quote:
Oh I love TWC! But not because of the neatly defined boxes.
It's rather impossible to invite folks to come here. What needs to be done to see more activity is make the site inviting :idea2:Quote:
If you want to see activity in this forum - invite people to it.
Ummmm...~:confused:Quote:
the only reason why now most people prefer TWC is because it already has more people.
That bears no relevance to how virtual spaces function. You can't see the inviting new Org while riding along the highway.Quote:
What needs to be done to see more activity is make the site inviting
Again with the "You don't play TW 24/7 and therefore don't 'get it' ". That's not a good outlook to draw in more people.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
I'm gonna go with: activity, the wiki, activity and probably activity. It updates on a regular basis and has people there to talk to. It looks alive and growing as opposed to here which is full of the same people arguing with each other over the same issues.Quote:
Then what draws you to TWC?
It is actually not impossible to invite people here. Sites generate traffic all the time from offsite things. Usually someone linking something of interest and people check it out to see if they like it. That's probably how you found a bunch of the sites and things you visit or do now.Quote:
It's rather impossible to invite folks to come here. What needs to be done to see more activity is make the site inviting :idea2:
People go to the place with more people. If you had to choose between here and there, most choose there because it is active. There needs to be something else to draw people here. It needs content. No one is leaving content for no content, I don't care how much you assure me that pretty forum lineups will bring them in.Quote:
Ummmm...~:confused:
It reminds me of the joke of all the old lodge members spending every meeting talking about how to get more members instead of, you know, doing something fun that might draw in members.
Okaaay cap'n~;)Quote:
That bears no relevance to how virtual spaces function. You can't see the inviting new Org while riding along the highway.
I'm guessing "activity" means "Frontroom/Backroom" kind of talk:shrug: I don't have an account there, but I occasionally lurk, and there's plenty of activity focused on the games. The arguing over the same issues is precisely the problem here. Instead of dropping in to find the latest patch/fix for your favorite mod, or talking tactics from your latest campaign, etc, and then popping in to the 'tavern' to shoot the breeze on the latest political/religious bruhaha, the latter is usually why most people come here anymore. Like I said, let's rename the place to suit the environment, cuz' it sure ain't about TW anymore:inquisitive:Quote:
I'm gonna go with: activity, the wiki, activity and probably activity. It updates on a regular basis and has people there to talk to. It looks alive and growing as opposed to here which is full of the same people arguing with each other over the same issues.
And what sort of content are you suggesting?Quote:
There needs to be something else to draw people here. It needs content.
You're missing the Gameroom, but more importantly you miss all the people who want to find TW information but have no interest in staying and discussing TW. If someone has a specific question about a specific mechanic and kthxbye, no contests or layout changes or anything of that sort will attract their residence. What you are depending on is a fundamental philosphical persuasion that TW is something people should come to talk about, and that isn't something that can be accomplished from within a forum.Quote:
usually why most people come here anymore.
People who have a specific interest in discussing legacy topics with those who share that interest should create or join dedicated legacy communities.Quote:
Instead of dropping in to find the latest patch/fix for your favorite mod, or talking tactics from your latest campaign, etc,
It's not obliged to be, just as humans are not obliged to live forever or institutions to perdure eternally.Quote:
it sure ain't about TW anymore
If we change the site format, how would people find out about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
And oddly enough, you would be wrong. It's another "you only care about the offtopic stuff". I still find it funny this assumption that somehow I'm not interested in TW. You never even considered I meant TW activity. They post new stuff constantly. Several times a week. Almost every forum has a post that day or only a few behind. It's active. About TW. Amazing.Quote:
I'm guessing "activity" means "Frontroom/Backroom" kind of talk:shrug: I don't have an account there, but I occasionally lurk, and there's plenty of activity focused on the games. The arguing over the same issues is precisely the problem here. Instead of dropping in to find the latest patch/fix for your favorite mod, or talking tactics from your latest campaign, etc, and then popping in to the 'tavern' to shoot the breeze on the latest political/religious bruhaha, the latter is usually why most people come here anymore. Like I said, let's rename the place to suit the environment, cuz' it sure ain't about TW anymore:inquisitive:
Well isn't that the question? What's the point of doing a forum change if we don't know what will go in it? A forum shake up is fine, I guess. But what's going to go in it? I have ideas and things I would add but if there's no new content then why bother?Quote:
And what sort of content are you suggesting?
You are ignoring the facts, my friend. Back in post #25, numbers were given for posts made since the beginning of 2016. Backroom #1 w/almost 149,000 posts, Gameroom #2 w/just over 90,000 posts. Together they outnumber ever other sub-forum combined...by a wide margin. And neither have anything remotely to do with a TW game:inquisitive: Can you consider it a coincidence that the Org's short-term decline (ie. the last 5-6 years) parallels the rising popularity of those two forums?Quote:
You're missing the Gameroom, but more importantly you miss all the people who want to find TW information but have no interest in staying and discussing TW.
Great! Then what do you want to rename this place to? Something more appropriate to its' current status~:smoking:Quote:
It's not obliged to be, just as humans are not obliged to live forever or institutions to perdure eternally.
Maybe not you personally, but the cumulative post count at the Org since the start of this year sez otherwise:shame:Quote:
It's another "you only care about the offtopic stuff"
Isn't that what we are discussing here~:confused:Quote:
Well isn't that the question? What's the point of doing a forum change if we don't know what will go in it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Joking aside, "rising popularity" is on a ratio basis, it isn't a case that people are joining to post in the off-discussion sections more, it is more that the loss is less severe in these locations than in the total war areas. Reasons are this are mostly older members who were dissatisfied with the newer titles, bored with the older ones, but still attend due to companionship through the bonds they formed with people over the years.
There are multiple theories to explain this loss, one is going along the lines of forums as a format, in general, along with the rise of social media, reddit, centralization of information. When I first joined the Org, TWC had already overtaken the Org in popularity, infact, that was the reason I became an Orgah was the smaller and more intimate community.
I have been told there were significant behind the scenes factors as to why this occurred, and why this increased. One big difference was TWC is a far more commercial enterprise, I remember reading at one point it required $500 per month to run, there are some very impressive amounts of money and investment has been put into that place. The Org has always ran as an enterprise done in someones backyard shed as a hobby in comparison, we were lucky to have a host who would let us have our internet space for free, and back in 1998, this was very expensive, even when I joined in 2008, internet hosting was not cheap. Now-a-days, we are able to self-fund the Org from donations people have previously given us and we had to rely on after our former host closed down their shop. It is comparing the success of the family ran hobby-shop to Walmart, the Org was not going to compete in the same environment. This is not to belittle TWC and their efforts, because seriously, they put a lot of work in that place and there is a reason it is popular as it is, and ignoring that would be a folly.
If you really want the "meat on the bone" to why the Org doesn't fare like TWC, it is because of Network Value. People chose a place like TWC for their number 1 resource because it is pretty much the number 1 resource for that information. Latest screenshots? Big scoop in a magazine? Someone has posted it. Someone is engaging in it. You might go "Why don't we have that?" and the simple answer is, is that the community is not providing it. We have a smaller community, so when we hear the big scoop, there are less members to hear about it, and post about it, opposed to other places. People say about Mods, and for many reasons before my time, TWC was able to offer better Mod hosting and support, so modders went over there. If you want your work seen by more people, and receive better support, where would you shop? Would be at the place that offers the best.
We are currently looking at options to see how we can better support things like forum structure, outside of changing what order the games are in, and if they are achievable, we can present and offer these. But I feel that we need to be honest with ourselves as to why things are as they are, and structural change will not do anything but quality of life for current membership.
IMHO, that is the chicken-or-the-egg dilemma we find ourselves in now. Nobody wants to do/post anything because there is no activity here but there is no activity because nobody wants do/post anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiDamascus
Content just doesn't happen. Somebody has to do it...and the community has to engage and respond.
@Beskar
As my favorite Vulcan would say...Fascinating!:logic:
:bow: I did however update the post, if you would like to read.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
That's why I felt the forum shakeup was.... nice but not the main point of this.
In regards to post: 91...
I give up... I can see (now) that to continue this activity would be utterly pointless. Thus I will not bother you - AntiDamascus - again regarding any of your claims, conclusions, statements and declarations on this note, or otherwise in this thread, or much else beyond this thread and topic for that matter. Please, bother not to write a reply to this post for my sake, I don’t need any....
- A
Its true that many people go to the TWC for the sheeple/horde-factor, it is an important reason - I’ll totally give you that much - but its hardly the only reason thou, that bit is untrue. There are plenty of reasons, obviously the index and TW-infrastructure is one of the many such reasons - especially so mod-wise. While less clearly visible in general (there), their TWC-locations does make lots more sense, and obviously the sectioning and overall infrastructure is clearly better too. All that matters for mods, and Im talking a modder here. Its especially true as of 2012 and beyond, but probably true earlier then that as well. Ever since Barocca left the Org (2008?), this site never really had a solid clue on how to handle it, well... Despite best intentions. I imagine. A lot of lessons can be learned from the TWC on that note.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crandar
Edyz is currently focusing on what happens AFTER we set up an index and infrastructure that works and invites actual use. You seem to be so inclined as well - in general I am all for that stuff - that is once I am convinced enough that this place is indeed worthwhile investing in again (time, energy and effort). The first step to make that happen is a serious and working index, and that is why I am focusing on it. Looking at it from a modders perspective - I expect a normal and functional index - but I am looking for an advantageous one beyond that, if this place can’t deliver any of that, I won’t probably bother to invest further energy and effort into this site - that’s the ultra short version of it. I seriously doubt that I am the only one on the planet who thinks that way - at least among modders anyways. Probably others as well...
This place will need them modders if it is to survive, there are no two ways about it. There is no one that can create content like a good (active) modder, if there is then that would be news to me. Either this place offers "me" (us modders) a sexy enough settings to work in or it gets left behind. And as it is, its being left behind. Obviously, that is not a good or desirable circumstance...
- A
I have little contestation to offer this (entire) post around. Nice...Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
The one exception, the last (colored by me, for clarity) part as I am utterly convinced that sexy enough infrastructure and index can indeed inspire and invite activity. I say that with my finest modder-hat on. I would even say so without it... All the same the index is only the beginning of a long journey, of course. Actual content is obviously a vital continuation of such a journey, beyond the index - I fully agree on that...
- A
That's nice I suppose. But I'll respond to whatever posts for my sake and the sake of others in a conversation. It's not a personal thing but I'm not going to like... ignore your posts cause you're done with me. Just ignore mine if it's that big an issue. On we go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Axalon
And this is the crux of the entire argument. "If we build it, they will come" and you'll recall from that movie (if you ever watched it, that is) that the entire premise was kinda silly and goofy. That's why no one believed and it was so magical when it happened.Quote:
The one exception, the last (colored by me, for clarity) part as I am utterly convinced that sexy enough infrastructure and index can indeed inspire and invite activity. I say that with my finest modder-hat on. I would even say so without it... All the same the index is only the beginning of a long journey, of course. Actual content is obviously a vital continuation of such a journey, beyond the index - I fully agree on that...
"I want this format, I'm the modder, I'm the important one, do what I want."
Calling people sheeple and horde is kind of a big issue here for this. It's this "I know what's best" idea running here.Quote:
Its true that many people go to the TWC for the sheeple/horde-factor, it is an important reason - I’ll totally give you that much - but its hardly the only reason thou, that bit is untrue. There are plenty of reasons, obviously the index and TW-infrastructure is one of the many such reasons - especially so mod-wise. While less clearly visible in general (there), their TWC-locations does make lots more sense, and obviously the sectioning and overall infrastructure is clearly better too. All that matters for mods, and Im talking a modder here.
Apparently people who do lets plays, artwork, wiki or other works don't count eh? I'm starting to wonder if someone has a modding only focus.Quote:
There is no one that can create content like a good (active) modder, if there is then that would be news to me.
It all ties into the big issue. There is an active TWC forum with mods, wikis, updates and most importantly, members already up and running. There seems to be an idea from people that simple changing the format will be the first step to... what? killing TWC and taking over as top dog? Being a fellow site that has an equal-ish size? What? I'll stand back on my previous statement. A forum shakeup is a small part of what needs to be done and I enjoy adding content and will add content if need be but this is really a personal preference of some that will likely have no real impact on activity. THAT will come from other factors.
Beskar, I agree for the most part with your post with regards to the forum structure and with the differences between the Org and TWC and the rest of the world.
What I keep suggesting for the past posts (mine at least) is that we enhance the content creation based on our community - we need content to bring here people. Content is king, and we need to have this in order to bring more people in.
And Orgahs are content creators.
:bow:
Rather a strawman argument, don't you think?Quote:
And this is the crux of the entire argument. "If we build it, they will come" and you'll recall from that movie (if you ever watched it, that is) that the entire premise was kinda silly and goofy. That's why no one believed and it was so magical when it happened.
Seeing as how the modding traffic here is second only to the bar-and-grill, I'd say making modders happy to come here is important.Quote:
I'm starting to wonder if someone has a modding only focus.
I don't believe anyone (including Axalon) is saying a simple change in format will magically transform the Org into a giant-killer (or more to the point---a TWC killer). But one thing you got right, IMHO, changing the format IS the first step...one of many that will be needed.Quote:
There seems to be an idea from people that simple changing the format will be the first step to... what? killing TWC and taking over as top dog? Being a fellow site that has an equal-ish size?
Make content because you want to make it, not because you think it will attract people. There are no taskmasters or bursars here.Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
Not from what has been said here so far. Do you have a 5-year plan and investment for the Org prepared that would validate this entire specious discussion?Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
Nobody said that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Orgahs produce content on their own because they wish to make it - the idea would be to kindly ask them whether they would like to be featured on the Org, making it a win win for both sides.
You might consider an official promotion of pan-TW content, projects, or contests in the Arena subforum. It's a gaming subforum, gets a good deal of board traffic if not posts, and it consolidates anything that involves work or sharing that wouldn't fit in a particular TW game's section. If, I don't know, you want to organize a TW machinima collaboration (as example), the Arena would be a good staging point.Quote:
the idea would be to kindly ask them whether they would like to be featured on the Org, making it a win win for both sides.
Why solely restricted to the Arena? This is mostly TW content, content that would bring people over because it has been made by Orgahs.
If you want to write an MTW AAR, by all means put it in the MTW AAR subforum. More broadly-construed "pan-Total War content" might go better in the Arena, and indeed content of that nature might be desirable - even something as simple as Total-War inspired art.
Such things can be moved or cross-linked from other related forums as needed/desired. We can also promote these things to "articles" on the Org front page.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Right - but my question is not exactly related.
My proposal would be this - Fellow Orgahs who produce content, would you like to be featured on the front page of the Org, and on the sidebars?
:book:
Alright, so it seems we have apparently babbled enough... Excellent!
Now, can staff/admin now please finally show me your colors so I can get a sporting chance to seriously assess whether or not I will be interested in investing again into this site, and this general Org-reboot. You can't stall it forever, and so far you have done an absolutely magnificent job at it, but it is closing in on a month now, and I need to know if this venture will include, or exclude, me as an active party in it. This of course are ultimatly dictated by what you guys are actually willing to do here. I need to have some clarity here if this is a meaningful investment or not - for me, by my standards. This before I commit or offer any further input and energy to this reboot.
So... Pretty please with extra pink sugar on top, kindly show me what you guys in staff have in mind, and/or what you are prepared to do (index-wise), no BS, just honestly show me (either by PM, or here in public, makes zero difference to me). A representative draft, or a few various drafts, of the site-index as envisioned by you guys - that will do just fine. Just show me were you truly stand at this point. I already know that tons of tasks and challenges awaits beyond that, but I want to see the supposed or the roughly intended foundation that all things are to build upon - the index - the first step...
We have waited long enough as it is.
- A
The index should not just be the sole focus, we need other areas that we can improve on. ~:)
That being said, how does everyone view this push for Org promotion?
Again... I know that... I have still not suggested that it should be... I have only said that the index is the natural and most obvious place to start, and that we should start there because of the fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
As it is, almost a month have past... I need to know what I am dealing with here before I decide if it is worthwhile investing in this reboot, or not - for me, by my standards. As much as I hope all this goes well, I will not commit to this blindly, sorry but I won't. And if that is the terms for it - then I'm out. Then you will have to do this without me. As I do want to know I will actually get for my time, ideas and energy. The best early possible indication of that IS the index. And so, I repeat the last part of my previous post...
Pretty please with extra pink sugar on top, kindly show me what you guys in staff have in mind, and/or what you are prepared to do (index-wise), no BS, just honestly show me (either by PM, or here in public, makes zero difference to me). A representative draft, or a few various drafts, of the site-index as envisioned by you guys - that will do just fine. Just show me were you truly stand at this point. I already know that tons of tasks and challenges awaits beyond that, but I want to see the supposed or the roughly intended foundation that all things are to build upon - the index - the first step...
We have waited long enough as it is.
- A
Org admins/mods, any thoughts on this? Any proposals from you guys? ~:)
I would certainly be willing to post a battle on Youtube from time to time (when I get the time to play, which is rare right now), is there a way to record my campaign battles or is it only custom battles that can be recorded? I am playing RTW, both vanilla and RTR.Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
i use https://obsproject.com/ to capture. its a streaming program but it also has a record feature that works incredibly well. the program is open source with lots of support forums that has info enough to tweak the recording settings for your quality standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Butler
Fraps is also the time honored "if all else fails" and has been around even longer than OBS. http://www.fraps.com/
We (the staff) have chased our tails around and around with these same issues a few times since Tosa's passing, trying some new things but without much success based on continued diminishing activity levels. This time around, it is interesting to hear from the Org patrons' perspectives what the issues we face are and what ideas you have to liven up the Org. BTW, thanks, edyz, for initiating the discussion. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
For my part, I'd be willing to resurrect the "Re-release Party" event I tried with M2TW a couple of years ago. It was well received and a fair number participated, but it didn't generate as much discussion in the M2TW forum as I had hoped. Maybe second time is a charm with another game?
I was hoping it would not involve outside software.:no: I wonder if I have some similar program hidden on my newer laptop, I am constantly finding apps on it that I did not know about, simply because of my ignorance of what different stuff is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk
I have been on the Backroom before participating in one or two discussions. What a complete waste of my time.:shame: I agree with RS, it is not a good sign for us if that is the main area that is visited.
RTR has its own forum now, so anybody looking for stuff on that will only find old stuff here. I don't know why they don't use the Org anymore, but it would be interesting to find that out. That is one example of modders going elsewhere. I don't mod, so I have no advice there. The bottom line is, it is hard to convince people to leave a perfectly good brand and go to a less known one that its developers don't know why it is becoming less popular. I know that is what everybody has been saying. 'Twould be nice to ask the people on TWC if they have heard of the Org, and if they were on it once, why they left.
That would work quite well, indeed. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Butler
Locally - Orgah produced - content would be the best for this website. Be it videos, AAR, content.
The Org is a special place for me, I'm doing my bit to keep it going. :bow:Quote:
BTW, thanks, edyz, for initiating the discussion. :bow:
As for your proposal - perhaps we can do a sort of an Org party for Shogun 2? It's more in theme with the Org as a whole, we were big fans of the original STW over here.
I'm not sure if this has been pointed out yet, I may have missed it, but the forum structure is basically upside down, a relic of a time when this was the "Technical" TW forum.
So - basically, the social forums, Frontroom, Backroom etc. should be at the top under the Entrance Hall and Watchtower. Everything relating to specific Total War games should be below that, then forums for mods, then archives. Currently you have to scroll all the way down to the Backroom, past the completely dead Warhammer forums, past the huge glut of archives, to get to the social forums where the activity is.
Right now the site looks dead.
Aside from that, I'd break the game forums up by era, so all the Classical games together, all the Medieval games, the Shogun games, then the Early Modern ones. Warhammer can go at the bottom as it has generated the least interest.
In terms of content - something like Frog's unit guides would be a good shout. I'd be willing to do the Roman Factions for Attila for a start, go through all the units, give stats, some opinions on use, add a historical not here and there...
Interesting to hear that. Are you still on the EB2 team? That whole project is heartbreaking for its persistence in the face of overwhelming wrongness. The engine was always grossly incompatible with EB aims, but EB was fun as long as you ignored what it could be. The Sisyphean work produced by the EB2 team collapses the illusion and causes suffering, if only because of the sense of potential lost in seeing team members push on with it rather than going elsewhere.
Now, if there were a Kickstarter for 2008 hopes and dreams, I would drop a $100 right away, but the spirit is gone for it.
The Classical and Modern TW game section idea is actually not bad - it differentiates easier and it's actually a good idea to break it up in this way. I'm quite supportive of this.
Can we see it happen, if we have at least a modicum of consensus around here?
I'd have to respectfully disagree with the index order. In fact, I would rather see it the exact opposite except the Entrance Hall & Watchtower, which should lead. Then the games (chronological or reverse chrono) followed by the social forums, and ending with the Archives. The whole proposed shift here is to emphasize the games/mods, not the bar and grill (which is basically all we are anymore:shrug:).Quote:
So - basically, the social forums, Frontroom, Backroom etc. should be at the top under the Entrance Hall and Watchtower. Everything relating to specific Total War games should be below that, then forums for mods, then archives.
I did very little work for EBII, my first breakdown came towards the end of EBI, my second came early in the development of EBII, I never really contributed much. I'm better now but I no longer have the free time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
I agree though - EBII should just switch to the Attila engine.
Here's the thing - we are a community of Total War players, not a Church to Total War. The Community has to come first. If you can convince people this is a community which they want to be a part of, which is safe then the site has a good foundation. You're already attracting Total War players because this is totalwar.org. The problem is they aren't staying, so you need to work out why that is. They're certainly posting in the Entrance Hall, then nothing is heard from them again. Take a look at the Index, it tells you how many people are viewing each forum. EB has the highest number, then it's pretty equal between Rome I and Medieval II, then the Backroom, then Medieval I, then it takes a sharp dive for the other forums from the 20's to less than 10 on average.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
The forum at the top of the game list is Warhammer and there's usually no one in there.
So here's the Scheme I propose:
Org General
-Entrance Hall
-Watchtower
Discussion
-Frontroom
-Backroom
-Monastery
-Meadhall
-Technology
-Arena
Classical Total war
-Rome I
-Rome II
-Attila (Separate game deserve their own forum)
Medieval Total War
-Medieval I
-Medieval II
Shogun
-Shogun I
-Shogun II
Early Modern
-Empire
-Napoleon
Warhammer
-Warhammer I
Forum Gaming
-Throne Room
-ARR Forum
-Gameroom
Crucially, hosted mods (Archived or otherwise) would be hosted under "Mods" and then "Archive" if they were inactive. An Exception might be made for Europea Barbarorum given it's laudable achivements and high activity but it should be noted that during its heyday EB was hosted under the Rome section of the forum.
The current scheme has become an unwieldy mess and it presents at least half a dozen semi-dead forums before you get to something with respectable activity.
It makes the site look dead.
Another thing we could do with would be a new theme - the Rome I one never did get ported AFAIK but aside from that a Rome II/Attila one wouldn't be a bad idea. Not a Warhammer one though, Warhammer has been largely ignored here.
If mods are archived, then archive them in subsections under their game; that's better than the alternative of a "Archived mods" section.Quote:
Crucially, hosted mods (Archived or otherwise) would be hosted under "Mods" and then "Archive" if they were inactive.
I agree that the EB 'franchise' might as well have its own surface section.
You don't mean a forum skin here, right?Quote:
Another thing we could do with would be a new theme
One thing to note about legacy forums for legacy games is that most of the activity for them is dedicated either to tech support (i.e. running the game) or design (i.e. user modding and scenarios). As I mentioned, people who come for the latter usually only have the one post to make on their specific issue. They're not coming here for anything else. For the second, well, what's left is what's left. However,
is a weird sentiment. I'm not saying everyone should stop their modding for TW games if that's what they are interested in currently, but for EB it's painful given that TW has next-to-nothing to do with the project besides being the host engine. I hope they invest in a serious game with bespoke or alternative engine, or just move on with their lives. When I said "Sisyphean", I meant it in a negative way.Quote:
EBII should just switch to the Attila engine.
We're getting off topic here but the goal of the of the EB team was to make Total War more historically accurate, the claim that the engine is incompatible with EB's aims is nonsensical in my opinion. I agree that Total War has big flaws but there's no other strategy game (that I know of at least) that offers both tactical battles and diplomacy, trade, and empire building. You gotta make due with what you have and EB II is a solid, enjoyable mod.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuuvi
What does not seem to be known is that the modding capability of any version after M2TW is a total disaster. Campaign scripting and map modding is pretty much non existent which reduces modding to unit rosters, start pos medleys and some eye candy dabbling. Mods like TATW or SS, heck any half way decent total conversion are simply not possible.
Otherwise: anything that reduces scrolling on the forum index is an improvement. Is it possible only to display forum titles with comprehensive description and not walls of sub forum titles? (It would make those lonely new version modding forums look less sad, too)
I had had a few pints last night. What I meant to say was "Crucially mods would go under a special 'Mods' section for their respective games."Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
i.e. not how it is now.
yes, a new forum skin.Quote:
You don't mean a forum skin here, right?
The problem, I think, with a lot of the proposals I have seen here is that it's just all about the games, not the community. It's right to say that the later games were not as well served by the site from M2 onwards (a lot of them were pretty bad at release) but that misses the point. A forum is a community - the strategy should be "come for the Total War, stay for the people"Quote:
One thing to note about legacy forums for legacy games is that most of the activity for them is dedicated either to tech support (i.e. running the game) or design (i.e. user modding and scenarios). As I mentioned, people who come for the latter usually only have the one post to make on their specific issue. They're not coming here for anything else. For the second, well, what's left is what's left.
From a design perspective Attila has a lot of what we wanted to do for EBI built into the engine, unit balance even plays somewhat like EB and it has all the requisite formations and mechanics to make it work. M2 simply doesn't.Quote:
is a weird sentiment. I'm not saying everyone should stop their modding for TW games if that's what they are interested in currently, but for EB it's painful given that TW has next-to-nothing to do with the project besides being the host engine. I hope they invest in a serious game with bespoke or alternative engine, or just move on with their lives. When I said "Sisyphean", I meant it in a negative way.
Ax is about as subtle as a piece of rusty farm machinery, but I have to grudgingly agree with his general position at least, in particular his first post.
The forum is about TW games and however much some members love the backroom/frontroom/gameroom, those are not about TW games, those are the sideshow and no site will ever survive focusing on offtopic alone. It doesn't matter how much traffic they get. Offtopic, is always high traffic chat, it's not an indicator of activity. And in the case of the .org's offtopic, it's the preserve of a few regulars generating an awful lot of posts. Traffic in offtopic is not "traffic" in your on topic sections.
I respect Philippus' opinion on this, but I find the idea of grouping e.g. Shogun 1 and Shogun 2 together or Medieval 1 and Medieval 2 together, to be borderline offensive ( :) ). I'm also surprised, if not a little bemused, at the suggestion to stick offtopic at the top. I've not seen any forum where the offtopic is at the top of the forum index and it makes no sense here either.
There is only one game which MTW should be grouped with (if at all) and that's STW of course. And I also agree that all modding related to those games should be contained within, or visibly attached to, those sections. Index length is irrelevant in this case, as it's important to "expose" what's on offer. A ridiculously long index could be a bad thing, but reducing visibility with the only goal being shortening the index is not a good strategy.
I think this new format isn't bad as such, it's just an unnecessary shake up of the index which wasn't needed. The old format probably needed a little tidy up, not a drastic overhaul. But at this stage discussing "board configuration" amounts to fiddling while Rome burns.
edyz, people wrote tens of thousands of words about "content creation" several years ago and it got us here. Most of the people who discussed that and pushed for more "content" are no longer here. "Synthetic" or forced activity to give an appearance of activity still isn't activity when all is said and done and is just a short lived boost, which cannot be sustained.
Forums are not about "content". This is the realm of blogs, etc. The .org was about a community and people with a shared interest, getting together and discussing this. The forum software only facilitates that. Much of the .org ontopic posts were about questions and answers about the games, posting about campaigns and just advising new players on strategy, game mechanics, etc, etc. A lot of this was repetition. If we turned this into "content", i.e. a nice guide or wiki with all the info you'd ever need on game xyz, in theory you'd kill traffic in the forum - in practice it doesn't work like that because gamers like to come to a forum and discuss these things with other gamers.
Unless people just get in there and start posting about the games again, activity will remain low. It's up to long term, influential members to just do that, rather than sitting around and waiting for a solution from staff/someone else.
In my opinion, what stifled things a few years ago, (around the time of ETW/NTW), was the culture of moderator intrusion. It was not possible to actually get into a heated debate or discussion without a moderator being on your case. I can remember threads going "off topic", but not in a bad way, the moderator appearing and cleaving the thread in half - and effectively killing it. When you do that, especially in a low traffic forum, you don't make me want to continue to participate (you're just letting me know that you're bored).
Pre-emptive moderation ("oh this looks like it might get heated, I'll jump in...") was the accepted norm and it prevented people from being themselves, making their mistakes and stopped things from flowing. I hold my hands up and admit that I did this, at least once, during my time on the staff here.
My point is that, the staff can't make the forum or generate traffic (or content), it's up to the members. In past we used to have a bit of a drive (or revival), every so often, in the MTW(1) forum. I would just post about playing the game, others would chip in and it would snowball from there. Then it would snowball into talking about tactics, modding, etc. That's how it works. You can't "invite" it, create it or "promote" it, you just have to be it.
The staff are important in that if they lose interest in the TW games and running the board for the sake of running the board becomes a hobby/duty/chore, then it will become detrimental to the community. This has happened before and it's partially why we're here discussing this kind of thing (again).
Traffic/activity can also be a false hope. A forum can have high traffic and still be pretty poor and not be a place I'd want to frequent.
Lastly, the idea of aping TWC, looking at TWC and comparing with TWC is not new and it just doesn't help the .org for staff and members to have that approach/mindset. I said it years ago - there cannot be two TWCs and there isn't room for two. .org needs to be radically different, to offer something different - and maybe - to a different kind of player.
As I said in another thread, .org has to follow the whims of CA and TW games became mediocre at best. Pining for CA reps to visit is futile and not at all necessary to the board's health/survival.
Activity - creates content, visits by CA reps (if that's desirable) and new member registration + keeps existing members here. It doesn't work the other way round.
A community...yes. But I strongly agree with AX that it's a community made up of micro-communities. Everyone has their favorite TW title(s), and primarily devote their attention to those favorites and essentially ignore the rest. I am certainly selective in this manner. I have my favorites, and I ignore the rest (never, ever have posted in ETW/NTW). I post occasionally in the Backroom/Frontroom, but I detest discussions about religion & politics which more often than not lead to heated confrontations where folks rarely back down, or change their opinion. But I do respect that others find these topics interesting.Quote:
A forum is a community - the strategy should be "come for the Total War, stay for the people"
The gist of AX's index restructure (as I understand it) is to cater to each "micro-community" and make it easier for any member to find what they want, be it tech info, mod info, or guides.
This. Spot on, and the sad indicator of what the Org has become (no offense meant to off-topic lovers:quiet:)Quote:
The forum is about TW games and however much some members love the backroom/frontroom/gameroom, those are not about TW games, those are the sideshow and no site will ever survive focusing on offtopic alone. It doesn't matter how much traffic they get. Offtopic, is always high traffic chat, it's not an indicator of activity. And in the case of the .org's offtopic, it's the preserve of a few regulars generating an awful lot of posts. Traffic in offtopic is not "traffic" in your on topic sections.
:2thumbsup:Quote:
My point is that, the staff can't make the forum or generate traffic (or content), it's up to the members.
In that case, as the grognard mentions, the index circa 2010 would have been just about right.Quote:
The gist of AX's index restructure (as I understand it) is to cater to each "micro-community" and make it easier for any member to find what they want, be it tech info, mod info, or guides.
I have a poll here about forum structure.
I would prefer the talk on that subject to be within that topic now, as it is a little different to "Org Promotion" which is a different matter.
Thank you very much for the forum structure poll, Beskar. :bow:
I am glad that we're taking a step forward in the right direction, let's keep at it. Please everyone go vote in the thread!
--> https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...orum-Structure
Posted in the "forum structure" thread, but my post has to be "approved"?
Someone seems to have forgotten how long and hard we fought to get rid of "junior members" and other such things...
Automatic software on forum, does odd false positive, approved it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostofxmaspast
Ah, the good old days of stratification and class struggle :whip: Back in the day it was Junior Patron, Patron, Junior Member, Member, Senior Member AND WE LIKED IT! :stare:
That may be true Mouza, but you and I don't speak for everyone here and we certainly can't speak for new members.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
I found the junior member thing and restriction of new members to the entrance hall silly and I believe it drove quite a lot of potential members away.
I heard it was one of the top reasons/drivers people went to TWC instead of here when this was the big site, and they were a start up.
back in the dinosaur days when post count was tied into stuff. ~:) The internet has changed a lot since then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
There was a lot of reasons we lost that race. this PROBABLY did not helpQuote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
edit: i double posted oh no haha
Bingo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Butler
For those running their games on Windows 10 (as I am), there is an app already on for doing game DVR, so no need to download external software (I don't think). Here is a link on how to work it
http://gizmodo.com/windows-10-is-hid...ool-1719196149
I will try this out when I get the time and report.
It seems a lot of blame is going to the index for the lack of enthusiasm for the Org and why TWC is getting a lot of traffic. I don't know that TWC has a much better index than the Org (though theirs does look less cluttered), I think the root problem lies deeper. Now their index seems more vivid with their TWC logos by each section, so that may help them. They have a lot of threads for Attila, much more than we have, but not much for Warhammer (comparatively), which tells me that
a) Warhammer was not as popular as the other games
b) Our problem started before Attila
Identifying exactly what drove people to TWC is the problem, and I don't know if there is any way to find that out. It is a sad state of affairs when the most generated discussion is on how do we get more people to visit the site, instead of the content of the site. It seems we need to get the newcomers, but here is something of note.
I googled "Total War Forums". The .com was the first, then after their stuff came TWC. We were the last link on the page. I googled "help with Rome Total War". I couldn't find us four pages in, I did see some erado.totalwar.org on page 2, whatever that site is. I got .wiki pages, ign.com, Total War Heaven, Steam communities, and TWC on the first page. That is a problem, but with my limited understanding of how that stuff works, I don't know how to fix the problem. Maybe give someone who does know something an idea, though.
I was just being silly :laugh4:
Of course you did. Especially as a Senior Member. :whip:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
Personally I find TWC's index a pain to navigate, I had to click on several different links just to get to the EB II forums so I just bookmarked EB and I haven't really bothered with the rest of the site very much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Butler
You are right that our problem started before Attila, I can remember the activity of this site starting to decline when Empire Total War was released and we had discussions about what to do about the decline back then as well.
I attempted to use the in-game DVR, I will have to try it again as it quit in the middle of my battle. I may have to set it up, the webpage I saw has a setup screen in the screenshot, and I did not see it when I went into it, so that may be the problem.
That may be happening a lot, I have done it on the Subsim forum I am on. Same with RTR. With the Org, I bookmarked the Forum site, so that is why I notice what is happening in other areas than the Rome forum, which is pretty much the only part I am on.Quote:
so I just bookmarked EB and I haven't really bothered with the rest of the site very much
I have not tried to navigate TWC, but as far as appearance goes, ours seems cluttered. For example, when I go to look at say the Rome section, I see the moderators and links to all the Rome subsections in a small area. Not that I am saying that we should copy them, but perhaps it is something that can be rearranged.
Of course, as RS has pointed out, maybe some of the regulars got their own lives and have less time for the Org. I am still single, so outside of college, work, and church I have no real commitments. Others may have gained some. That said, we are trying to figure out why we aren't getting new people as well. As I pointed out, somebody googling Total War stuff is not going to see us because we are so far down the list of hits. I think that is by amount of visitors to that particular site, but am not sure of that. If we can change that somehow we will be in business.
Perhaps someone can answer this question. How popular is modding the game versus just playing the vanilla version? Do we need to tailor our appeal more to modders or regular gamers? I am just asking because a lot of people bring up the modding community. I know I mainly play just vanilla RTW, some RTR, some EB. I tried MTW2 but the inquisitors drove me away. Also, do more people focus on one game, or do they have a more broad range of the TW games that they play?
That's the kind of stuff that starts it - looking for a fix that is. If the solution is easily found (it's a simple text file edit), or even just the place where to ask, then the forum is doing a good job of providing support.Quote:
I tried MTW2 but the inquisitors drove me away.
With the right motivation it also starts modding - even more so if the forum environment supports this as well. That is if you can find the place -
- Forum
- Historical Total War Titles
- Medieval 2: Total War
- M2:TW Modification
- Learn to Mod
- Modding Questions
Anyone surprised that the last post in that forum was six months ago?
Seriously? The question is probably not asked correctly, the direct answer: if you can't mod then you haven't much of an option. If you still play the vanilla version after more then 10 years then hats off to you.Quote:
How popular is modding the game versus just playing the vanilla version?
If the question is 'Do you still play vanilla or modded versions?' then I am wondering if you have ever tried a mod.
With regards to RTW and M2TW I would simply say that without the excellent modding capabilities these versions have they would have slipped into oblivion like ETW, NTW, S2 have already done and as R2 is busy doing. I think the question should be 'How much modding is still happening and how can it be supported'.
Certainly not by burying the forums 5 levels down.
:laugh4: Toché!
Excellent post, Gigs.
- A
Thanks, I have my moments https://i290.photobucket.com/albums/...ns/whistle.gif
Good point on how far you have to go to find stuff on modding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantus
I think I like vanilla RTW because of its simplicity. RTR is nice, but still has bugs last I knew, and with 16 credits this semester, including three upper division electrical engineering classes, I have had virtually zero time for gaming.
I love EB, but it is certainly more in-depth. With the extra lengths of time to build, and increased costs of building and training, it is not as casual, so I will have to wait till I get more time to devote to a campaign. Also, it has a tendency to eventually crash in a campaign, and I can't get those campaigns to work again. I like to see a campaign through at least till I beat the game, preferably till I conquer the entire map. However, with EB, that will probably not be the case, considering the size of the map.
You just stated more reasons why mods need the proper exposure and support. Picking up a mod and trying it and then having problems playing is a sure put off if you haven't got good access to problem solving. It's rather simple - the more feed back a mod has the better it will evolve.
Putting 'older' (low traffic) mods into a forum suffixed 'Archive' is about as much as a death kiss as one can wish for:
Last post - July this year, a bit over 30 mods in there. Any surprises?Quote:
All in all you have 5 active mods for all Total War versions - prominently displayed and taking all the lime light. Now why would anyone bother about those other 30 mods further down?
It's only two clicks from the first layer to the last.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantus
How would you arrange this particular example to make it more accessible or easier to find?