Alts, the Taste of a New Generation

Starting the Alt discussion thread.

DH1 has a strong tradition of not allowing alts for the regular player. For a period of time staff carried alts for TP related reasons but that sort of fettered out after a few complaints I think. Not really sure but I'll assume that's what happened.

Now, Gulp has stated he doesn't see any real strong pros to alts but a lot of cons.

While I can agree with that, I think it's a good discussion to have regardless so people can voice their thoughts regarding it.

Pros of No-Alts:
Focusing in on one char
No concern about Char information crossover
No bloated player numbers

Cons of No-Alts:
Players who burn out on a char don't have any alternative besides canning the char
Only experience one aspect of the game
Limits creativity and the variety of potential character concepts.

Feed this thread. FEED IT.

Alts may reduce the desire to screw people over (Why screw someone when you know they have another alt they have invested time into) would also reduce hard feelings over screwage.

I have a tendency to think up a new character concept and get really excited about it, and then have no outlet. It happens a lot with concepts that don't have a lot of longevity, or I wouldn't be interested in as a primary character, or if I didn't have some more interesting output.

The problem is I'm not interested in playing an extremely limited character, either.

If we go with alts, then I would suggest only allowing the player one connection at a time rather than allowing a player to log in with his/her alts at the same time.

I believe we should avoid alts.

Especially on DH2. DH1 is actually better suited for Alts. But DH2 presents a unique problem. Do you side with your main character or against? If it's against, you're going to wind up crossing the streams a lot and having to opt-out of scenes to avoid that. You could be a Republic and then a Smuggler... but it seems that smugglers will often come into frequent contact with the Republic vs Sith struggle.

If you say "ok, no crossing the streams, we just play alts on the same side" then you're just boosting your side's numbers. You're a SpecOps sniper? And you play a pilot to help out when we need piloting.

I think that, in the first six months at least, we should avoid having any alts. Keep the policy of one-player one-character. Focus on driving the story and character development and then, after we've not only got the game going but have NEW players coming in again... take a look at alt-policy.

Not that I don't think we can still talk about it now. But I really don't see a way out of the twisty traps alts can create.

Firehawk wrote:

I believe we should avoid alts.

Especially on DH2. DH1 is actually better suited for Alts. But DH2 presents a unique problem. Do you side with your main character or against? If it's against, you're going to wind up crossing the streams a lot and having to opt-out of scenes to avoid that. You could be a Republic and then a Smuggler... but it seems that smugglers will often come into frequent contact with the Republic vs Sith struggle.

If you say "ok, no crossing the streams, we just play alts on the same side" then you're just boosting your side's numbers. You're a SpecOps sniper? And you play a pilot to help out when we need piloting.

I think that, in the first six months at least, we should avoid having any alts. Keep the policy of one-player one-character. Focus on driving the story and character development and then, after we've not only got the game going but have NEW players coming in again... take a look at alt-policy.

Not that I don't think we can still talk about it now. But I really don't see a way out of the twisty traps alts can create.

I entirely disagree with your assessment that DH1 is better suited for alts. DH1 is a complete and utter free-for-all. You could easily make an alt that was never designed to come in contact with the factions and end up doing so completely on accident. Everyone is opposed to everyone and there is no regulation or tracking. Absolutely nothing is clear-cut and most people don't even have clear loyalties. You couldn't even know when you're coming into a potential conflict of interests until it's too late. With solid, clearly defined factions, it's much easier to develop a clear-cut policy.

I'm with rcrantz on this one. While I prefer to focus on one character, the temptation is always there to have a flash in the pan alt for fun. To stir up trouble and what-not.

But, ultimately, things like information and interest crossovers start becoming a problem, intentionally or otherwise.

Perhaps there could be a way to retire characters for a while (other than +die) and pick up something brief, if you're feeling constrained by a particular concept. When you've had enough and want to go back to the primary character, just pick up where you left off, assuming the IC world around you didn't affect your social position/assets/etc while you were on an IC vacation or something.

I'm honestly against doing a 'vacation' period perse. But I do think that having an outlet for people to RP a different concept besides the one they currently occupy could be a good avenue. The idea that only one can be logged on at a time is great. Another potential conflict is favoring one over the other . An alt is an alternate, that infers there is a main.

What if a 'Main' character were identified and established. Any 'alt' played by a character would have a level cap (10 or so) if they want to make that 'alt' their 'main' character, Main goes bye bye and the Alt can then advance. It gives encouragement too for Player Death in good storylines to know they have new plots set up and what not. Just putting ideas out.

I'll just clarify that I think both DH1 and DH2 are NOT well suited for alts at all.

But either way, I still don't like the idea of alts. Even if they were only on one at a time.

With the various mentions of worries about abuse of +vote circles, etc. Alts would have to be monitored not just for command usage, but for the IC information they know about.

The Main/Alt idea with a level cap is a good idea... but there's still some issue about IC info, and we don't necessarily want "throwaway" characters, which some people might view an "alt" as. Since it's level-capped, etc.

My problem with alts is that, intentionally or otherwise, there will be information crossover. Your 'main' character is a Sith General, but you play a street urchin on the side. Said street urchin happens to overhear two Rogue Squadron pilots discussing an elaborate ambush on a Sith patrol. You could leave, but your street urchin greatly admires the Rogue Squadron and someday, wants to be a pilot among them. Maybe he wants to stick around and try to get his X-Wing holo signed after they're done talking.

Perhaps it is just cynicism, but I find it highly unlikely there wouldn't be a conflict of interests. It will probably be more common with those who fancy their characters intergalactic superspies, no matter how much they would deny it.

Why the hate for throwaway characters? There are certain concepts I'm just not interested in playing long term or as a primary character that I would still love to play around with. I've never done so because the system as-is heavily punishes throwaway characters.

Why? Why does the system not want me to have some fun, frivolous concepts that aren't going to last?

As it stands right now, there are few surprises anyway because of the sharing of OOC information. I have never seen a game that has IC/OOC information sharing controlled. The simple fact is, people say alts would make that worst. No, it wouldn't. It would make it obvious, big difference.

Alts spread focus of RP thin.

Alts run the risk of abuse with information crossover.

If someone is burnt out with his or her character, I would say death is a perfectly reasonable choice. That, or taking a break from the game. If a break would not restore interest in the original character then an alt would make little difference.


I strongly believe alts are a bad idea. Single characters provide focus and immersion. It creates attachment to the character, a sense of value.


As for staff alts... that, I think, should be stopped. I do not think staff should have more than one character for RP purposes. If they create a character for a plot, then that character should be removed from the grid entirely after the TP is over. If staff needs to have a character they use to provide other players with "quests" then they can always @emit it. @Emit is your friend. The ability to +check stats makes this method feasible.

You're why mommy and daddy left each other.

But anyway, I've nothing extra to add. There is certainly the possibility to have alts. I don't, personally, think it's a good idea mainly for the info crossover that might happen.

Don't you think a lot of people would be a little upset about potentials for IC-info crossover through alts?

It might make it more "obvious" or it might lead to more people jumping to conclusions. What if a character DID discover a plot to blow up the Sith Factory and suddenly the guard tripled?

Could that lead to... unpleasant OOC feelings from the Republic Side? Especially if an alt was involved?

I think we should try to minimize ways that might lead to OOC bad feelings.

See I find the contradiction in some statements to be a little difficult to follow.

If people grow tired of a character they should kill it, because a non-alt system allows for individual immersion and attachment to a character. So that'll make people more apt to kill it off because they are heavily attached to it? Seems kind of contradictory.

I personally have no position on alts myself. I play on two games and have two characters. Even if Alts were available, I wouldn't take one. But that says nothing for the position that it should be examined and given very viable basis. To me saying 'It might potentially lead to info crossover' isn't exactly a viable basis. That is going to happen no matter what. It's like saying having a vote/XP system might lead to some players outpacing others and becoming overpowered. It's not a' might' it is a 'will'.

I'd like to hear valid arguments besides the IC/OOC info crossover honestly, nothing yet has really seemed to me to be the blatant 'this is why Alts would suck' mentality. Because let's be honest here people, if someone is going to take Ic/OOC info from an alt anyway? They'll do it other means.. so punishing those who could add great story from a character for an action that another player would take regardless seems like tossing baby, bathwater, sink, and maybe even the first floor bathroom all out.

There is one advantage of alts that may also solve the ever-present XP problem.

Alts let the reclusive Sith abomination get XP.

They let people go out and RP and even if the alt is totally unconnected to the main character, accumulate XP through RP to send back to their main who might be unable to leave a small area for whatever reason.

SexyBoy wrote:

Alts spread focus of RP thin.

Alts run the risk of abuse with information crossover.

If someone is burnt out with his or her character, I would say death is a perfectly reasonable choice. That, or taking a break from the game. If a break would not restore interest in the original character then an alt would make little difference.

Not true in the slightest.

It's easy to get burned out by a certain aspect of the game, and think that the entire game is like that. Sometimes it is the character, not the game, that has you burning out, and no matter how long of a break you try to take, you can't escape the fact that the character has become stressful.

Whereas spending some time playing something that is not that character, is not involved in the drama, et cetera, provides some valuable perspective.

I think that were there alts, it would be a big mistake to let them share XP.

Character 1, let's call him Recluse, gradually grows almighty by hoarding XP, and stays in his lair.

Character 2, let's call her Bunny, wanders the grid and gets into every possible RP she can, piping massive XP back to character 1.

I like to think that XP growth reflects a hero's progression over time. In this scenario, however, where is Character 1's progression as a character?

----------

I used to be very fond of an excellent and thoughtful FAQ called On The Proper Care And Feeding Of MUSHes. The author was a former Dune MUSHer who mentioned that one of the old Dune games used a "tiered" alt system. Certain types of character were almost purely meant for background roles. They weren't susceptible to combat, or starvation, or any of the other things that could happen to "main characters"; by the same token, they couldn't fight against "main characters," achieve rank, or do anything like that. They were, in short, fun for experiencing the kind of RP a "main character" couldn't experience, and if I recall correctly they could be used as alts by people who played main characters.

My personal distaste for alts stems from the way they seem to dilute RP, decrease investment, and inflate apparent activity without necessarily leading to more or better story. But I wonder if it would be worthwhile to give players potential access to "mook-level" alts -- characters who aren't heroes, who aren't agonists, but who can give them a change of pace. If we had such "mooks," it would be understood that they wouldn't have the spotlight; if push came to shove, PCs would win every time. They probably wouldn't advance, or wouldn't advance at the same rate. But they would give that sense of variety, and allow exploration of throwaway roles without rampant turnover.

You know, just in case someone wants to play a totally average stormtrooper, just trying to do his job and keep together his long-distance relationship with his girlfriend Trina.

I've always been strongly against No-Alt policies. Very, very, very commonly I feel that despite my level, I'm insignificant compared to some of the other members of DHI.

Mostly because of the lack of a "lower level floor" beneath me. At the same time, some of the higher level PCs aren't so intimidating because of the mathematical averages of levels.

Perhaps allowing 2-3 'mooks' per character, that either gain EXP at a limit rate (Maxed votes, lower XP per vote, etc) or capped to no level, there would be the average throw-away characters we want.

Plus, as a Sith, we all need mooks to force choke.

I rather dislike mook-level alts.

My opinion...and it is just that, my opinion...is no to Alts.

In this game and in this made up environment the chances of someone helping their alt out some how is more than likely. It will happen, guaranteed. Then you open up the "prove it" "Did not"...on and on, bad feelings will come up, players will suspect, assume and....well it just causes more problems than what is it worth, in my opinion.

As much as I would love support for alts, I think it works infinitely better on consent-based games, which we aren't. I would rather no alts than mook-level alts, and full alts are the sort of thing which would probably lead to a lot more drama than is necessary. What I'd instead like to see is some form of support for throwaway characters--perhaps an application to be able to hit save on an old character, then start over from scratch as your throwaway concept, and then freedom to rejoin the old character if you feel so inclined.

If there's a possibility for throwaway characters that aren't mook-alts, I'd be interested in what you might mean, rcrantz. From my understanding, mook-level alts provide all the elements of a throwaway: limited advancement that doesn't dilute the plot away from PCs, an opportunity to take a break and a change of pace, pretty much an average Joe Schmo trying to make his way out in the galaxy.

I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly, but what you're suggesting seems to me very much like simply shelving an old character, and perhaps coming back to replay the character later if the urge takes you. Mook-alts provide very much what you describe, if it is truly a throwaway concept.

We used to have this...sort of and in a different name.
We used to use the temp-alts that staff gave to players for special scenes. The great thing about those roles it really didn't matter if you died, you gained nothing, you got to taste a role that your main character didn't normally play, you filled in where needed in the main plot.

For example, I had a generic space cowboy type, but there is a big space battle being planned. Used to there had to be a PC in each ship (except for fighter squadrons but you had to have a "leader" character in the "leader" fighter. I got to go try out space combat, whoo! It was fun@ I loved it so much I directed my character to be a fighter jock.

You have a space jock, there is a gorund combat planned, grab a temp-alt, fill in, fight for the side you want to try out, find out it is a great time...next character you go that way.

I say we should bring back the use of these temp-alts. We had great player base, folks got to taste other rolls, many went to the roll that their temp-alt was. Win Win for the game and the players.

Okay, there is definitely a lot of positive to Temp-Alts giving people a taste of RP they don't normally get.

However, that thing Gulp said in the other thread... what if the Death Star Battle had PCs in each ship? What if the Battle of Endor JUST had PCs?

That A-Wing pilot that took out the Executor? That was your best friend. He's dead. But he took out a SSD.

Your other friend? Died covering the Falcon as it made its run into the superstructure of the Death Star.

Emotion, Passion, Feeling!

Could Temp-Alts... hurt certain character types? Like "Oh, if I want to be a fighter jock, I'll just temp-alt" or "Oh, if I want to be a pirate smuggler, I can temp?"

Or is the benefit of getting a taste a few times good enough to outweigh that sort of stuff?