Linkshell Management Recognition

[Rhomagus]

Day #5 May 27, 2011

Since I covered arguments against the implementation of this feature in my post yesterday, I'd like to briefly touch on them today in hopes of focusing them more directly and properly.

I can agree with the point about too many posts being made about this topic. There are way too many dead threads from March. Some that absolutely no one responded to. Adding to the pyre of dying threads only spreads the issue out and makes it seem invisible. I'm sure if you were to combine all of the threads on this one topic, the post count would be considerably higher. This is why I included Poppa's post into my OP yesterday. The largest thread so far regarding this topic is [dev1024] Linkshell Administration Options. The very purpose of this thread is actually inspired by the topic title of that thread.

I couldn't help but laugh at the desperation involved with disguising such an obviously needed feature as another important feature. Please don't be mistaken. It was not a jolly laughter at all, more like a nervous laughter. The kind of laughter you have when you mess something up, really really bad or when someone gets severely injured, or something that seems so contradictory to reality it doesn't quite compute in your brain.

Like a dog running for president...

of the moon...

and winning...

in a landslide victory.

Anyways, the very idea that the topic hadn't been addressed in beta seemed absurd to me. The very idea that they had responded to some linkshell qualms from XI were warmly welcomed and are certainly worth applauding such as:

1.) Linkshells not taking inventory space.
2.) Being able to actively read posts made by multiple linkshells simultaneously.

At first it seemed great. A breath of fresh air. Then, once you had people talking in multiple linkshells and wanted to respond to the one that wasn't your currently equipped linkshell, you came across the monumental task of doing so. You began to wonder, "This is great and all, but why would you not include an easy way to talk between linkshells from the get go? What's the point in implementing such a feature when it's potential is so severely stifled that it's in effect rendered useless? I should bring this up on the forums?"

Then you think, "Nah, I'm sure they're working on it. Even if they aren't, I'm sure some childish troll is ranting and raving like a lunatic about it. It's such an obvious feature, I'm sure it's been given the proper attention."

And then one day you find, [8 months] have got behind you.
No one told you when to run.
You missed the starting gun.

The threads start off well intentioned. You see people posting ideas they think might enrich the linkshell experience, much like your own idea, or perhaps speculation on what player run companies might entail, but in your research you begin to see spiteful posts as the months wear on. Posts vigorously demanding features. Speculations on the development teams competency or lack thereof. Page long treatises on the merits of responsible business management. C++ code writing 101. Comparisons to FFXI. Comparisons to WoW.

Then the pleas start...

I wholeheartedly understand that the priorities are on basic functionality of key areas like syntheses and battle. Just, please, and I'm begging here*, just let us kick people who've quit the game out of our shell without having to break, remake, and reform the entire thing.

Take as long as is needed for the rest*, but that one part is making it really difficult to manage our connections efficiently.

...I'm not going to even bother to ask for anything fancy* - just let us remove inactive people from our shells. I can't imagine this basic feature could really cause a lot of work to implement while giving us a very important fundamental ability desperately needed.

You suddenly realize that your simple suggestion was actually considered fancy in comparison to some of the requests that have already been made. You agree with Anonymoose, a regular contributor to the wiki and general XIV knowledge base on Eorzeapedia, in putting your suggestion on the backburner.

You feel tentative to post, because you aren't a childish troll. You're a rational human being with well reasoned opinions. You can admit when you're wrong. You're pretty easy going. Never too quick to anger. Alas, now you're second guessing yourself. What you thought was an easy fix, a unanimous issue, perhaps a glitch, a small oversight, a non issue, something everyone would be in favor of, is severely overshadowed, in both passionate discussion and in breadth, the solitary need for linkshell masters to kick someone from the shell, who is not logged on, because they have quit.

"Maybe we were meant to RP out our kicking of linkshell members. Why else would they implement the system as it is today? I get it now. They need to personally contact, outside of the game, the person they need to kick; schedule a time that they can meet up; meet up; then say "Ye're now ousted from th' linkshell, scrag."

"Why else?" You hang on those two words. Why else?
...
You're stuck.
You're stuck at the ballot box wearing a pin on your lappel that reads, "I voted for Lassie". You forgot to turn off your synthetic gravity perpetuation machine.
You realize "reason" was never an option when the general election was between a dog and an 8 month old ham sandwich.

And you're a vegetarian.

That's as close to describing the kind of laughter I felt when I came across the thread initially. As a player since CE release, I've been involved with discussion on controversial issues such as the implementation of a jump feature, class locked gear, and the implementation of the "traditional" jobs. I thought that it must be really difficult, as a development team member, to implement changes that the community is so torn on. To my surprise, not only were they controversial topics, but they all had dev-tags associated with them.

Some issues, that I'd never even thought were really issues, had a dev-tag associated with it. Such as the following:

- [dev1047] Battle music now cuts in and out, rather than fading in and out.
- [dev1054] Rocks in front of the Adventurers' Guild in Gridania and next to the NPC Maisenta have been removed from the game.
- [dev1042] Messages informing players of items obtained through gathering now display the item's icon next to its name.

Go ahead and look. It jumps from [dev 1034] to [dev 1059].

Some things were just straight implemented, such as:

The text command /display head (on/off) has been added.
/display head on – Display head gear.
/display head off – Hide head gear.

In light of this, why would one need to go as far as Anonymoose and Vackashken in their deliberations. They are beyond suggestion. They're beyond demanding. They're pleading.

I've gone even further. They want something actually done. I'm just calling for:

[dev1058] Examination of Linkshell Tools

The crowd is waiting. "Sprach Zarathustra" by Richard Strauss can be heard, but the president is not allowed on the carpet.

*emphasis added by me.

[Rentahamster]

You writing a short story here? lol!

I love your writing style

[Keith_Dragoon]

Rhomagus is the lord of text walls but they are well formed and insightful.

Also Rhomagus I had one other guy argue against this in one of my first topics. i will quote it next time I get on pc but the gist of his argument was that the feature was not needed because HE can work around it with social list and /tell which made kicking/inviting a painless ordeal.

[Rentahamster]

the gist of his argument was that the feature was not needed because HE can work around it with social list and /tell.

That statement in itself is very telling since the very fact that he even has to "work around it" in the first place, means that the current solution is sub-optimal.

[Keith_Dragoon]

That statement in itself is very telling since the very fact that he even has to "work around it" in the first place, means that the current solution is sub-optimal.

I tried to point that out but it would be easier teaching my cat how to fly a plane

[Poppa]

Thanks Rho for the shout-out edit on the first page ^^. This is a topic that should be addressed, however as I have been told several times that this topic is not important right now *cough - BS - cough*. As of right now (and I believe this) the focus is purely on the battle system. After that is implemented in 1.18 I think we (all LS masters and leaders get everyone in their LS's to post about this) should flood the forums with the dislike on how LS tools are not in game. I for one would back anyone up on this matter. I know (trust me by the post that Rho did) the amount of threads there are concerning this matter.

Its just a shame that this was not thought of in the implementation of the game. It also show the lack of competency that the original team and the current team has when it comes to LS management and playing MMO's. They claim they have played MMO's in the past, I do not believe them when this is a constant issue that has been posted since March.

I am not a LS master, just a leader that is very upset with the ghosts we have in our LS.

[Rowyne]

I am not a LS master, just a leader that is very upset with the ghosts we have in our LS.

There's something elegant about this statement. And catchy.

"Ghosts Of The LS"

[Keith_Dragoon]

There's something elegant about this statement. And catchy.

"Ghosts Of The LS"

I know right? if I could rename my shell ghosts of Trabia I would because now 100% of my members are inactive including myself because I'm too attached to my ls name to remake it over and over.

That and I loathe solo.

[Elkwood]

Bumping and will continue to bump both LS topics until the Devs get it straight the players want this now not just the battle reform, this has been complained about since beta and since every complaint in Beta was ignored SE better fix this now.

[Alothia]

I agree. I will continue to bump this until we get some actual feedback on this topic instead of "It's not a priority." It should be a priority.