Experience Awards

[SirArtemis]

Hi there!

Well, from what I gather, experience is assigned based on total posts that are made in a particular thread. However, total word count is not looked at. I was wondering if this was true, and if so, why? I made a thread that was only 9 posts long, but had approximately 13,500 words. Would I have received more experience if I had broken up the very same number of words into 15 posts?

I would request that, if anything, word count and/or post count do not play a role into the amount of experience you gain. As long as the minimum is reached, it should be sufficient. A new variable should be used to help judge experience earned. If you were to use one over the other, wouldn't word count be more meaningful than post count?

For example:

Category I: 10,000 -12,500
Category II: 12,501 - 15,000
Category III: 15,001 - 20,000
Category IV: 20,001-27,500
Category V: 27,501+

Each category could have a "multiplier" applied when a post falls into that range. Of course, this is just an example. I'm not even certain if this is actually how things are graded.

[Tainted Bushido]

As a moderator I can tell you, while post count does contribute to the amount of experience you gain, it is by far one of the smaller variables of the equation. Level and score by FAR play the more serious roles in such an equation.

EDIT: I feel like I just rudely brushed off your concern with that explanation. As to your comments on word count over post count. The reason we go with Post Count is because post count is easily measured and tangible. Atop this it allows for people to make shorter posts if need be.

Word Count on the other hand encourages people to bloat posts unnecessarily and while both do contribute to bloat, post bloat is by far the lesser of two evils. Writing six page posts are fine if they all contain content. However, six page posts meant to abuse the fact that Word Count is taken into consideration, may overcome any score penalty for the bloated writing.

Since we already emphasize post count over word count (by allowing you to bypass a 10k word MINIMUM for a thread) it makes sense for those who write their solos for ten posts and get their experience.

In your case spreading it to 15 posts might have netted you 10-15 more experience at MOST.

[Christoph]

That statement is actually alarmingly inaccurate, Pat. A ten-post solo quest scoring a fifty from a level 0 earns about 650 EXP, whereas it would earn about 815 with 15 posts. That's a significant difference. For a score of 60, the gap actually widens a little, with 818 for 10 posts and 1022 for 15. Higher levels increase that number, though probably keep the ratio about the same. So, fallacy number one is debunked. Moving on...

Fallacy number two: Post count is far more easily measured. Well, I'll give you that one to an extent. However, it really wouldn't be that hard to establish a standard post unit (probably 500 - 700 words) and eyeball posts accordingly. In other words, if a post is around 1,000-1,500 words, it would count as two "post" in the EXP formula. It'd be a little more work for the judges, but not much compared to the work of actually judging the thread.

Fallacy number three: Adjusting according to word count would just encourage players to needlessly bloat their posts. That is utterly ridiculous. As you yourself said, if players bloat their posts with junk, they will score lower, thus more than negating the impact of the longer posts. So, sure some players might try to pad their posts, but they would be stupid to do so. Player self-interest would mitigate your concern. More likely, players would be more likely to post longer, complete scenes in single posts instead of needlessly breaking them up.

[Visla Eraclaire]

The current system is not perfect, but perfection is impossible, and the proposed replacement doesn't address the situation in a way that solves the root problem.

The root problem is that you want to reward people for longer threads and thus greater exertions of effort without encouraging clipped posts or bloated writing.

The actual solution that has been used and should continue to be used is discretion. A judge gets a sense for what the "average" length of a post it. As long as the post fits within certain ranges, you don't get into the business of counting words. If there are half a dozen unusually short posts, you might adjust the variable down in the EXP equation. If there are similarly large posts, you might adjust it up.

The system only fails when judges use the formula mechanically rather than as a guideline. EXP awards are discretionary and can be modified up or down as needed. That's how it works now and that works as well as anything could, as long as people are vigilant.

[Christoph]

Just make that standard policy, then. The problem is, and always had been, that many judges either don’t know that they're allowed to do that, or can't be bothered. I don't think we want to encourage players to request certain judges who they think will use EXP discretion in their favor. There needs to be a standard procedure for how judges can and should apply that discretion.

[Visla Eraclaire]

You can't have a "standard procedure" for discretion. That's the whole point of discretion.

Mods should be aware of their discretion, but beyond that there's nothing to be done. I'm fairly sure they're aware. Beyond that, there's really nothing more to discuss. If they weren't aware, they should be now.

[Duffy]

There is an issue with post length that is solved, for the most part, by the rubric.

I'm not defending the system, I'm merely pointing it out.

You can't write 15 shorter posts and expect them to automatically increase your experience by an amount worthy of the risk. Clarity might go up, but continuation and action and setting may fall.

I'm all for an adjustment, and for discretion, but I thought the idea behind judging was to remove the writer's personal opinion from the equation (even though we all know this in itself is impossible). What good would adding another cause for difference of opinion to drive a nail between writer, judge, and 'the system?'

[Visla Eraclaire]

This isn't an addition. It's an existing discretion unless it was expressly removed fairly recently.

Furthermore, this isn't the sort of opinion that's likely to cause disputes. If it's used appropriately, it won't be used on slightly long or slightly short posts. It will only be used to correct bloat or reward unusually long posts.

If this worries you about mods, you should be terrified already. It's so minor and non-subjective compared the the WHOLE system of largely subjective judgment calls.

[Christoph]

You can't write 15 shorter posts and expect them to automatically increase your experience by an amount worthy of the risk. Clarity might go up, but continuation and action and setting may fall.

First of all, what? That made no sense. If anything, many shorter posts are more likely to decrease Clarity, especially if there are multiple breaks within a scene. And score really has nothing to do with the core issue; some stories involve long scenes and others short. It's a combination of what the writer views as more efficient and convenient and the demands of the narrative. Neither method is inherently superior, and thus both should be fairly rewarded by the judges.


I'm all for an adjustment, and for discretion, but I thought the idea behind judging was to remove the writer's personal opinion from the equation (even though we all know this in itself is impossible). What good would adding another cause for difference of opinion to drive a nail between writer, judge, and 'the system?'

That's just another reason to establish a standard procedure, as I outlined already. A judge's personal biases wouldn't matter (no more than they already do, anyway) because the practice would have an established method, that being: posts of X length count as two posts, and so forth. Sure, you might get players who try to stretch posts out a little more to hit that X length range, but it'll either backfire in their score if they needlessly pad their writing, or if they're smart, they might just end up with a better, richer scene. Either way, that issue would take care of itself

[Duffy]

this isn't an addition. It's an existing discretion unless it was expressly removed fairly recently.

Furthermore, this isn't the sort of opinion that's likely to cause disputes. If it's used appropriately, it won't be used on slightly long or slightly short posts. It will only be used to correct bloat or reward unusually long posts.

If this worries you about mods, you should be terrified already. It's so minor and non-subjective compared the the whole system of largely subjective judgment calls.

qft. ;)

[Visla Eraclaire]

Get real Christoph. You've been around long enough to realize that things don't change easily.

Change on Althanas takes a huge problem with nearly uniform support and a well-defined solution that is easy to implement.

This lacks all those qualities. It's good that Artemis is thinking about ways to improve the board and getting involved, but this just isn't something that's going to happen. He had a good intuition, but wasn't aware of all the procedures in place.

[Duffy]

Get real Christoph. You've been around long enough to realize that things don't change easily.

Change on Althanas takes a huge problem with nearly uniform support and a well-defined solution that is easy to implement.

This lacks all those qualities.

qft2. :D

[Christoph]

To be fair, even changes with nearly uniform support and well-defined solutions don't often happen. So... I never actually expected any changes. That doesn't mean the issue shouldn't be accurately illustrated every now and then.

[SirArtemis]

well I'm glad this is being discussed...

My concern for this was raised because I actually have 4 posts out of 9 that have about 2500 words in them.

I understand its hard to have a set solution, but if a solution occurs behind the scenes, you can remove the likelihood of padding. Even if you implemented a system where a single post "counts" as a double post, or even triple, as long as you did not inform the public what these word-count thresholds were, the lack of knowledge would prevent padding.

It's obvious that if 701 words counted as a double post, you would possibly see that people would be pushing for that extra word to break the threshold. However, if no one knew that it was 701, they wouldn't do such a thing.

Furthermore, my own suggestion would be to remove the use of post count entirely from determining the reward. Use the 10,000 words/10 posts as a minimum qualification for a post to be judged, and leave it at that. Give the score of a post more weight to account for the removal of the post count variable, and that way, everyone is judged strictly on the quality of their work, and not the quantity. As long as it's "long enough" then it's sufficient.

My only concern is that this system in itself contradicts the lifelong lesson for any writer that "quality is better than quantity." Don't you remember the old days when you had to write an 8 page paper, and you fluffed maybe the last 2?

Make experience and awards a byproduct of ONLY level and quality. You could also maybe give a bonus if multiple people were involved, simply to promote group projects. However, SLIGHT bonus.

[SirArtemis]

Get real Christoph. You've been around long enough to realize that things don't change easily.

Change on Althanas takes a huge problem with nearly uniform support and a well-defined solution that is easy to implement.

This lacks all those qualities. It's good that Artemis is thinking about ways to improve the board and getting involved, but this just isn't something that's going to happen. He had a good intuition, but wasn't aware of all the procedures in place.

You have no idea how depressing reading this is. It is almost an exact replica of the real world, where we need an incredibly devastating event to occur simply to use it as a catalyst to build momentum for change. Is it so wrong to make change before there is a huge problem? And the solution I now propose is easy to implement, is well defined, and I think everyone would prefer this method.

Then again, I admit that I'm new, but that should be valuable in allowing me a different perspective on a system that I haven't become so accustomed to that I'm immune to its potential flaws.

[Duffy]

Not to mention, changing one part of the machine affects the entire machine's performance.

If we enhance or reduce experience, we equally have to shift the borders of the current levels. If we increase experience too much, the levels become meaningless, if we decrease it, the forum turns into World of Warcraft and the input and effort people place in their writing will be worthless (although it's arguable if it's worthy anything as it stands in terms of productivity or for that matter, in terms of doing anything outside of Althanas - Booker winners we ain't.)

I have no fundamental aversion to altering the experience formula or the method of achieving experience, but snapping fingers or winkling your nose like everyone's favourite 1960's witch is not going to happen.

[Letho]

To be fair, even changes with nearly uniform support and well-defined solutions don't often happen.That's because we're elitist and hate our members. Forever! :eek:


In all truth, this horse has been beat up so many times by now I'm afraid there's not horse to beat anymore. And the bottom line is always the same; the system works. It's not perfect, but as Visla pointed out, it probably never could be. The formula we have handles things well in general, and anything that stands out of the ordinary in one way or the other is handled by judges' discretion. And they do know that they have the power to adjust the rewards. They are aware that the formula gives a base value which they can then adjust. And so far it's been serving us well.

You have no idea how depressing reading this is. It is almost an exact replica of the real world, where we need an incredibly devastating event to occur simply to use it as a catalyst to build momentum for change. Is it so wrong to make change before there is a huge problem? And the solution I now propose is easy to implement, is well defined, and I think everyone would prefer this method.I don't really see how could this turn into a huge problem, if it's a problem at all. It hasn't so far. We've been using more or less the same formula for years now and the walls aren't falling around our ears. If you're so concerned about the EXP rewards that a hundred points here or there makes such a huge issue for you, then I'm afraid you might be here for the wrong reasons. Althanas is not just a game you play with words, where every rule is clearly defined and where every word is worth x amount of EXP, and when you grind enough of those, you get a shiny new set of spells or whatnot. It's a writing workshop where you get to write with other people and get feedback on your work. In such an environment, EXP should always be a secondary concern.

[Max Dirks]

Furthermore, my own suggestion would be to remove the use of post count entirely from determining the reward. That idea's been thrown around before, but it somewhat limiting. If post count is removed from the equation then (provided the scores and participant levels are the same) 30 post quest will receive the same amount of EXP as a 10 post quest. Presumably, the 30 post quest would take a lot more effort to complete than a 10 post quest (and you can use either post or word count here as the same problem would exist for both). This isn't always true, obviously, and our rubric has plenty of opportunities to account for effort in addition to judge's discretion. However, the problem is that adjusting EXP in the case of a 30 post quest places TOO MUCH discretion into the hands of the judges. Everything we do from a judging standpoint is designed to be normalized to a point where it is fair for all players. It's not perfect by any means, but it's the best we've got given our chosen system.

[SirArtemis]

well, I'm not saying that there will be a huge problem, it was just a thought. From what I gather, this website has been around for many years, so I'm sure it's fine. I suppose my only frustration stems from wanting to be able to write more "out there" stories, and until I'm higher level, my weapons, armor, and abilities are for the most part limited to a normal human being. I mean, that's not the worst thing in the world, don't get me wrong. I just have read so many stories about incredible characters, that I feel like my character is just another person. More experience would allow me to grow my character faster so that my stories could become more eccentric, especially with respect to fighting.

In the end, if it stays the way it is, it won't hurt my feelings. This was just an area to post suggestions, so I did. No one said that every suggestion would be taken, and it was clearly considered. There's nothing more I could ask for :) I wasn't ignored.

I suppose you can close this thread, unless you want more feedback.

[Christoph]

It's certainly not a huge problem, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't make positive changes. I mean, god, it'd be so pathetically easy to fix. (I wouldn't suggest removing the Post-Count modifier, but just making it standard procedure to adjust that number based on post length). EXP will always be a large concern because the majority of members can't tell the stories they want at low levels. I mean sure, by this stage I EXP is only a minor concern for me personally, because I'm a high enough level to tell basically any story I want. That might change if I made a new character, though.

Even the formula itself has issues, beyond the post-length problem. Longer threads are worth proportionately less EXP per post than short ones. Again, even this would be fixed easily by adjusting the Post-Count modifier in the formula. The EXP payouts would increase a bit, but I honestly see that as a good thing. How many new members felt like they would never gain the level they desired, and just gave up? I would guess quite a few.

Finally, judge discretion on this issue sounds all well and good, but it just doesn't happen as far as I can tell. For one reason or another, the judges very rarely adjust EXP rewards based on post length.

[Letho]

It's certainly not a huge problem, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't make positive changes. I mean, god, it'd be so pathetically easy to fix. (I wouldn't suggest removing the Post-Count modifier, but just making it standard procedure to adjust that number based on post length). EXP will always be a large concern because the majority of members can't tell the stories they want at low levels. I mean sure, by this stage I EXP is only a minor concern for me personally, because I'm a high enough level to tell basically any story I want. That might change if I made a new character, though.But isn't that a part of the Althanas experience? Hasn't that always been a part of the Althanas experience, not counting the IW days? There are other places where you can do whatever story you want and have whatever character you want from the get go. On Althanas you start from the bottom and work your way up. And while EXP is not a concern to me anymore either, it hasn't really ever been a concern to me. I started a number of characters after Letho and got a good number of levels on them, starting from the bottom every single time, and I was seldom worried about the EXP points accumulated on that account. I'd say that maybe it's just me, but I'm scarcely the only person who had done that.

[SirArtemis]

in the grand scheme, the experience different between the current system and the proposed alternatives isnt that extreme. the only reason i brought it up was because i wasnt sure about the discretion system of giving people more credit for long posts or not.

[Silence Sei]

I suppose my only frustration stems from wanting to be able to write more "out there" stories, and until I'm higher level, my weapons, armor, and abilities are for the most part limited to a normal human being. I mean, that's not the worst thing in the world, don't get me wrong. I just have read so many stories about incredible characters, that I feel like my character is just another person. More experience would allow me to grow my character faster so that my stories could become more eccentric, especially with respect to fighting.




Isn't this kind of the point to making a character? Almost everyone starts out a no-name. You earn the incredible stories through -writing- incredible stories. Thor didn't have Godly Ice abilities when he was a general for Alerar. Sei only had 3 abilities until level 5, and didn't even get half of his arsenal until level 5 as well.

Not to be mean or anything, but didn't we create these characters to -make- them rise from the ashes of obscurity into things of greatness? I'm just sayin, is all.

[Letho]

The main concern that always rises up from this (and I'm going to jump ahead and intercept it before someone brings it up) is that there are people who don't want to follow the rising-from-the-ashes story. And I understand that to an extent. However, we're not forcing people to play utter weaklings and fifteen years old lads still looking for their place in the world. I'm not going that particular road again because that's a can of worms I have no desire to reopen, but suffice to say you can still write great stuff with level zero characters. All it takes is a bit ingenuity.

[Christoph]

But isn't that a part of the Althanas experience? Hasn't that always been a part of the Althanas experience, not counting the IW days? There are other places where you can do whatever story you want and have whatever character you want from the get go. On Althanas you start from the bottom and work your way up. And while EXP is not a concern to me anymore either, it hasn't really ever been a concern to me. I started a number of characters after Letho and got a good number of levels on them, starting from the bottom every single time, and I was seldom worried about the EXP points accumulated on that account. I'd say that maybe it's just me, but I'm scarcely the only person who had done that.

Letho saying "It's the way we've always done it, therefore it must obviously be the best way"? I'm shocked. :p Furthermore, you're edging toward Strawman territory, because nobody is suggesting the abolition of the EXP system. I too like the "build your way up" aspect of Althanas, though I'm also far more into dark, low fantasy than high fantasy, so the low levels don't bother me as much as others. That said, there's a difference between encouraging players to work their way up the ranks and encouraging tedium. I wrote some fun stories in the lower levels, but many of them felt like EXP runs, because after a fair number of quests, I'd basically done everything that I wanted to with that power range, and my character was still too weak to move on to the new stuff I wanted to do.

All that isn't even the issue here, and I agree with Letho that it's been argued a lot before and need not eat up this thread. I'm merely pointing out that if characters get to advance a little bit faster due to a change in the EXP formula, it would not in any conceivably sane way be a terrible thing. ((But while we're on this subject, I recall the staff announcing that the Registration system had been changed, but has it actually been updated in the appropriate threads, where new members can find the updated guidelines?))

And I will make the observation that even us high level folk, who claim (and honestly, I believe) not to care a whole lot about EXP, still pay it enough notice to argue about it. =p

Anyway, regarding the thread's actual topic, I will again point out that the solution is immensely simple. Just post some fancy announcement in the mod forum at least -encouraging- judges to use the sacred Discretion in adjusting EXP based on post length, and perhaps include my earlier proposed method for doing so with minimal effort. Then, fiddle with the formula a little bit so that the post count variable is a little higher, and thus the difference in per-post value won't shift quite so much. This could be accomplished in a matter of minutes, would hurt absolutely nothing, and it would make the entire EXP system more even-handed and fair.

[Atzar]

ITT: Christoph and TB somehow find a way to argue when they actually agree; Duffy begins the trend of one-word posts with no substance; and horses can be beaten into nonexistence.


You have no idea how depressing reading this is. It is almost an exact replica of the real world, where we need an incredibly devastating event to occur simply to use it as a catalyst to build momentum for change. Is it so wrong to make change before there is a huge problem? And the solution I now propose is easy to implement, is well defined, and I think everyone would prefer this method.

Then again, I admit that I'm new, but that should be valuable in allowing me a different perspective on a system that I haven't become so accustomed to that I'm immune to its potential flaws.

In general, it is fairly difficult to enact change here. It typically requires a unanimous vote to happen. Even when there's a majority vote, we tend to argue the point back and forth - ten people against one or two - until everybody gets tired of arguing and the topic dies with no real resolution. It doesn't make any sense, but it does happen. I agree with you that this shouldn't be the case. At the expense of the feelings of the minority, I think we need to force action more often than we do - hurt feelings don't last forever.

Having said that, I believe that the system should be left the way it is. I think post count should have a modifier, because a 20-post quest should gain more than a 10-post quest, all other variables equal. As has been stated, it reflects more effort and time put into the thread. I feel like tweaking the existing formula to give more or less EXP for length would essentially be replacing one arbitrary number with another - we don't know if the current equation is best, and we won't know if a slightly modified equation is better.

As an aside, Sir Artemis, know that your input here is appreciated and will continue to be appreciated whenever you give it. Thanks for starting this thread.

[Letho]

Letho saying "It's the way we've always done it, therefore it must obviously be the best way"? I'm shocked. :pWell, I'd hate to be inconsistent.
And I will make the observation that even us high level folk, who claim (and honestly, I believe) not to care a whole lot about EXP, still pay it enough notice to argue about it. =pWe wouldn't want to rob the noobs of all the good times we had at low-low levels. ;)

Anyway, regarding the thread's actual topic, I will again point out that the solution is immensely simple. Just post some fancy announcement in the mod forum at least -encouraging- judges to use the sacred Discretion in adjusting EXP based on post length, and perhaps include my earlier proposed method for doing so with minimal effort. Then, fiddle with the formula a little bit so that the post count variable is a little higher, and thus the difference in per-post value won't shift quite so much. This could be accomplished in a matter of minutes, would hurt absolutely nothing, and it would make the entire EXP system more even-handed and fair.There is actually a note written in bold letters in the official thread regarding judging in the mods forum stating that judges should use the formula as a mere guideline and use their discretion to adjust it if they deem it necessary. As for fiddling around with formula, I'm with Atzar that we shouldn't be messing with it. OMG, another shocker, I know. :eek:

[Tainted Bushido]

ITT: Christoph and TB somehow find a way to argue when they actually agree; Duffy begins the trend of one-word posts with no substance; and horses can be beaten into nonexistence.

Whoa whoa whoa there buddy! I only posted once, that can hardly be considered an argument. If I had posted calling Christoph a dirty monkey cheaty face, that's another matter entirely. I merely was stating that changes to the post count were minimal. Alright, so my estimate was off by maybe a hundred XP, but that STILL is considerably smaller even once you hit level 1 and are reaching the big leagues. (which ironically begins about level 3-4 and continues till you have more experience than god... (http://www.althanas.com/world/member.php?u=7)) I mean, do we even have an Epic Character quest board or something?

[Atzar]

My point was that your viewpoints weren't necessarily that much different, yet he still managed to crank out a three-point rebuttal. It amused me.

[Rayse Valentino]

I haven't read any of this thread but, a little tweaking is all you need. Put more into the multiplier from score and level, put less into the one from post count. That way, a 30-post quest of similar score and levels would still receive more exp, but not a substantially large amount more, and the lower-post count quest would receive more exp as well, but being a bad, short quest now is much more detrimental to exp than being a bad, long quest, effort-wise.

Whether or not something is interesting should always take precedence over how long it is.

[SirArtemis]

Honestly, my only intent in this entire thread was to point out that my 13,500 word story would receive less xp because it is 9 posts, rather than if i had spread out those 13,500 words over 13-15 posts, which is doable.

If judges take this into account with respect to discretion and actually LOOK at word count, then the problem itself is solved. I was just told that post count matters, and the only time word count is even mentioned is that you need 10,000 word count minimum OR 10 posts to be judged.

Here are some options:

1) Amongst the mods, and away from the writers, give "rough" thresholds that make certain posts, when longer, count as 2-3 posts.

2) Remove post-count/word-count from the formula, but allow judges discretion to award "bonus xp" if a thread surpasses pre-determined "checkpoints", you provide a higher level of xp.

Eg. 10-15 posts or 10,000-15,000 words. are one threshold, and 15-20 or 15,000-20,000 gets another threshold. that way, an "average post" is 1,000 words.

Again these are just examples. I just feel that post count is given weight and word count isnt, when word count is really the determinant of effort. At least in my opinion.

[Rayse Valentino]

Most judges only skim the threads they're supposed to review, some don't even read the thread at all (http://www.althanas.com/world/showpost.php?p=163962&postcount=23). How do you expect them to put in the extra effort to count up the number of words?

[Visla Eraclaire]

I've read a lot of threads and posts are usually about the same length. The longer you post the more you get a sense for when you've finished "a post worth."

I don't think it's worth changing anything. And I'm the guy who loves change.

It's fine to discuss, and I'm glad we have another person on the forum not afraid to speak up and try and get something changed, but you picked the wrong issue this time. It's just not a real problem. Any attempt to "solve" it creates a problem in terms of setting the new metrics and ensuring they have no perverse incentives.

I hope it isn't too soul crushing for you, Artemis, but I'm a realist. I've been arguing this kind of stuff for years. There's been some positive change. It just wasn't on anything that looked like this.

If you're that worried that your posts are too long and you're getting gyped, cut them up or point it out in your judging request.

[Silence Sei]

Most judges only skim the threads they're supposed to review, some don't even read the thread at all (http://www.althanas.com/world/showpost.php?p=163962&postcount=23). How do you expect them to put in the extra effort to count up the number of words?


That was a workshop thread. It therefore received the condensed rubric and you got feedback from four judges on it. It was read.

Now back on topic-- We are discussing a change to the exp formula in the mod forums now, and hopefully will reach some consensus that will please most everyone.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Well don't waste too much time on it. Changing the formula has far reaching implications and shouldn't be done on merely the barest showing by one person that his posts are somewhat long.

Remember, if you're basing any comparison of your post length to an "average" post, the 10k rule is really not representative of what a decent solo is. A 10k word thread is very likely more than 10 posts. I've had solos that seemed long barely clock 10k and be well over 10 decently sized posts.

[SirArtemis]

Well don't waste too much time on it. Changing the formula has far reaching implications and shouldn't be done on merely the barest showing by one person that his posts are somewhat long.

Remember, if you're basing any comparison of your post length to an "average" post, the 10k rule is really not representative of what a decent solo is. A 10k word thread is very likely more than 10 posts. I've had solos that seemed long barely clock 10k and be well over 10 decently sized posts.

Well you say that, but that's my very issue. I had 9 posts and 13,500 words. So then what? o.O

[Visla Eraclaire]

Make shorter posts. I skimmed your thread and some of your posts are quite short, others quite long. Usually over the course of a thread it balances out (though rarely to 1k per post). I don't think a single 9 post solo with some really really long posts is a representative sample. If I were judging it, I'd count it as more like 12.

You have to realize that the whole system is full of wiggle room and whenever you pin something down it's just an arbitrary decision.

Your first solution is basically what is already being done by mods who do their job carefully.

Your second solution is extremely arbitrary, worsening the problem rather than ameliorating it.

Setting firm standards just creates unexpected windfall exp for those who go over them and unexpected losses for those who miss them. It takes a non-trivial amount of time to determine word count. All it really adds is "consistency" but a consistency that is based on something wholly arbitrary is really no better than discretion wielded somewhat randomly, and it's worse than discretion used properly/

Just keep writing and don't sweat the 100-200 exp. You absolutely are going to get scores that are 4 or 5 points lower than you think you deserve. Other times mods will let you level up with unusually strong powers. Other times you'll lose or win battles by a single point or two that causes a massive swing in exp.

You can't take it so seriously or it'll eat you alive. If you're playing the board as a game and you're playing to win you're going to be sorely disappointed. There are a lot of ways to game the system and a lot of it is luck. If you're just here to improve writing, roleplay, or have a good time telling stories, you'll enjoy yourself. If you get hung up on numbers, you're going to get a headache.

[SirArtemis]

Well, again, the reason I raised this was just because I was unsure. I did not know that judge's discretion could be used to consider the thread as more "posts" than it actually is. I'm sure the mods will do what is best for judging. I just was concerned because of what I had heard, and my personal situation.

[Rayse Valentino]

That was a workshop thread. It therefore received the condensed rubric and you got feedback from four judges on it. It was read.

Now back on topic-- We are discussing a change to the exp formula in the mod forums now, and hopefully will reach some consensus that will please most everyone.

Feedback from 3 people, but an actual score by 1. The former read the thread and gave feedback, the latter didn't and put in random values and called it a day. Hell I would take a score by any of those 3 people over the guy who closed his eyes and cycled through the numpad.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Rayse, you could at least pretend that your personal griping about the same old shit has something to do with the topic at hand.

Artemis, I completely understand where you're coming from and I'm sorry if what I've said has been demoralizing. It's always good to have mods thinking about why they're doing things and not falling asleep at the switch. While I doubt the exp system will change over this, it's good to give a little prod and reconsider things from time to time. Trust me, 9 times out of 10, I'm playing the role of you in these threads. It's just a really tiresome role and I decided to take a vacation and try and save you the trouble of tilting at windmills while I was at it.

Keep questioning. Althanas despirately needs it.

[SirArtemis]

well here's the thing... experience, overall, likely doesn't matter. However, at lower levels, that 100-200 is more relevant to leveling, so it has more significance. It's not that my stories overall are going to change as I level up more, though obviously I'll be able to do more... "extreme" things. My main thing, to be honest, is customization. Customizing my weapons and armor with enchants, names, higher quality materials and such is not permitted at lower levels. So, it's nice to develop your character as you level up. I'm not against the process, by any means, but at lower levels, your experience is already limited because of your level. So.. yeah.. i have nothing left to contribute. the mods are likely taking care of it.

[Tainted Bushido]

Let me just say you certainly have gotten our attention. Already we have a discussion going in the mod forums that, before it exploded with Rayse's attempt to skew information in a favorable light, was on par with this thread's activity. We are looking into it, it's just a matter of if things will change drastically, and how much...

[SirArtemis]

Let me just say you certainly have gotten our attention. Already we have a discussion going in the mod forums that, before it exploded with Rayse's attempt to skew information in a favorable light, was on par with this thread's activity. We are looking into it, it's just a matter of if things will change drastically, and how much...

given that it's being talked about, then there's nothing more i can ask for. it's probably best to just close this thread. the agenda has been reached and mods will make their own decision.

[Letho]

well here's the thing... experience, overall, likely doesn't matter. However, at lower levels, that 100-200 is more relevant to leveling, so it has more significance. It's not that my stories overall are going to change as I level up more, though obviously I'll be able to do more... "extreme" things. My main thing, to be honest, is customization. Customizing my weapons and armor with enchants, names, higher quality materials and such is not permitted at lower levels. So, it's nice to develop your character as you level up. I'm not against the process, by any means, but at lower levels, your experience is already limited because of your level. So.. yeah.. i have nothing left to contribute. the mods are likely taking care of it.See, the thing is in order to customize your weapons and accessories and upgrade them, you can either get them as a spoil for a completed thread or buy it in the Bazaar using money you get from completing threads. So regardless of which you opt for, level is not as significant to the customization and completing more threads actually benefits you. As it stands now it takes, what, like three of four decent threads to get to the first level? I think that's well balanced. Gives you enough opportunity to get some loot and develop your character before you level up.

[Hysteria]

I like the current system, if only because word counts a harder to count than posts. However something like this (http://www.althanas.com/world/showthread.php?t=21162) comes up and I am not sure if word counts might be more nessicary, even if its just a guideline saying something like "Consider the amount of words making each post when deciding the post count".

[Tainted Bushido]

That thread was done as a project. It was to show it's not even possible when pulling stuff out of your bum, typing with your butt on the keyboard and attempting to FAKE your way to a score of a 1.

[Hysteria]

It also shows that doing say, four of those threads (taking maybe 15min?) would give you more xp than a normal solo.

[Letho]

Not really, because only an idiot of a judge would actually award EXP for something like that. That's where the discretion would kick in. Duffy listed the rewards more as a joke. At least I hope so. :P

[Duffy]

Disclaimer. No experience will be awarded for the completion of the talented epic And One (AKA 'SHOotz')...

As Letho pointed out, it was a joke to highlight various issues with discretion, post count and let's face it...I only gave it a 10 because I was laughing so hard when reading it.

[SirArtemis]

well if anything, we're at an advantage here because we have a small and dedicated group of forum judges and moderators who all want what is best for the website. I have faith that they will come up with the best solution, even if it doesn't fit everyone's wants and needs.

Don't let the desire for perfection take away appreciation of a near perfect product.