Cleaning Up Instancing

[Marten]

The big issue is IC Nexus, ie, how can many people have a private instance of a supposedly public Age, my feelings on this is that we should stop there, and just say that the DRC and Yeesha in the past have come to an agreement about the Nexus system

I don't feel that Nexus needs some sort of Yeesha-related explanation at all. After all, Nexus somehow worked during the last days of the D'ni without any Yeesha magic!

My thinking has always been that Nexus is engineered as a beehive of small rooms with nexus terminals. Just as Gahreesen was designed with rotating buildings so that a person could not link in without risking being melded with a wall (except for the center), somehow Nexus was built so that the chances of two people linking to the same cell is infinitesimally small.

[Owehn]

I hope you don't mind if I try to summarize a lot of the discussion that's gone on here:

There are two desires for good gameplay that can oppose each other:

• The desire for the users to have as much customizing at their disposal as possible, so that they can enhance their experience in as many ways as possible.
• The desire for the users to have as shallow a learning curve as possible, so that they can have an experience to begin with.

The extremes each line of thinking would produce are:

• An incredibly dense user interface that is extremely difficult to learn.
• A learning curve that is so shallow, there's almost nothing to be learned.

For example, the 3d modeling software Blender has multiple functions assigned to (just about) every key, so that if you know your way around you can accomplish a lot very efficiently. However, the key patterns don't seem (to my untrained eyes, at least) to have any uniform organizing principle, so it's hard to learn your way around in the first place. On the other hand, the chat-channel options in Uru are extremely limited: to either a private chat with one person, a public channel for Age Players, for Buddies, or for Neighbors. There's extremely little customizability - the Age players are whoever you're with at the moment, your collection of neighbors rarely changes, and the buddy list consists of people whose online status you want to keep easy track of - and there's correspondingly little to learn about chat channels.

Fortunately, it isn't impossible to satisfy both demands at once. It can, however, be difficult to make sure you don't compromise both, the way moving groups around in Uru is so difficult. (For example, a group can solve Gira/Kemo together, but the way to move multiple people back and forth is hard to reach, so it violates the first desire, and isn't very intuitive, so it violates the second.) To successfully incorporate easy customization without bogging people down in a screen full of alternatives needs careful consideration. Some solutions that have been suggested are:

• Remove those options until the user can take the time to learn them (a "ride").
• Have the options present from the beginning, but make the first option to present itself the one the user would likely have picked anyway ("variable defaults").

The books in the Relto bookshelf do a good job of this (or would if graphical difficulties didn't obscure it). In the beginning, you have no choice in where to begin each Age (you're put on a ride as far as linking to the Age goes), but as you explore and find journey cloths, you gain the option to return to one of those places via the journey bookmark. Once a journey cloth is activated, it becomes the first link to appear when you open the book (a variable default) but the old linking panel is still available on the next page. This would be a good system if the "turn page" option weren't so hard to see - if the way to turn pages were easier to recognize, or if the journey bookmark were on the facing page of the linking panel, it would be even better. (I suspect they weren't both visible at the same time so that Relto visitors would have access to just one of the links, as they can't turn pages. That's another limitation I'd like to see bite the dust.)

I also think that having a dense user interface is a good thing, by which I don't mean a screen crammed with options clamoring for selection, but rather a tidy and efficient use of the option space. For example, the cleft book in Relto is a dense interface: rainy and dry cleft are presented clearly and both are within easy reach. The KI should be dense with buttons so that you can access as many of its features as quickly as possible, but there's room for "rides" (gaining KI function in a modular way, rather than all at once) and for "variable defaults" (if you click on the flashing "incoming KI message" button, it should open to that message or invitation).

There may be a chance to add some more functionality to the bookmark idea. Specifically, a "private link" bookmark in Relto could double as the journey bookmark sending you to the location of the last journey cloth you touched.

Possibly. "Overloading" behavior is something that must be done with care. The person may want to return to their private instance but not link to the last cloth touched... and since the private link bookmark will appear in other books not in the player's Relto, it might be confusing if it behaves differently in two places (players can only link to the main link-in spot when using a book outside of Relto).

Sorry, I didn't mean that linking book with the private bookmark would only link to the last cloth touched. Instead, I was trying to combine the bookmark idea with the existing UI in the Relto bookshelf: link through the linking panel to get to the start of the Age (or wherever the panel shows), but link through the bookmark itself to get back to the last cloth touched. Since this feature is only available on the Relto bookshelf at the moment, it seems reasonable to allow that functionality only from Relto as well. (More on that below.)

Also, while I agree that using the KI to set up and manage parties must be possible, I don't think it has to be the only way: on some books outside the Relto bookshelf, the single-hand "journey" symbol could be replaced by the double-hand "share" symbol, and accepting the shared link could constitute joining a new group led by the one sharing the link (which is how I imagine sharing a link should always have worked).

I think it's really best if there be a single method to set up a party, and not have two different systems; I'd rather see the lock tabs go away entirely.

The idea of sharing links to start a group may be borne out of not wanting to use a clunky KI interface to set up a group, especially if everyone who wants to come is standing right next to you anyway. If the KI becomes smoothed out, my complaint might go away completely, but for the moment I do think a more ad-hoc, local way to start a small group wouldn't go amiss. I'm not sure what lock tabs have to do with it, unless that was about visiting the leader's Relto - for which I think you've got a good idea: Since the leader's "group relto" bookmark doesn't have any linking function, it can be tied to the permission of the other members' ability to link to the leader's Relto. That's a nice way to keep the interface dense, yet predictable. I view my idea about the share symbol similarly: if you want to give someone access to your personal instance of a nearby book, you click the "personal instance" bookmark, then them. In your Relto, there's no need for book sharing since they already have access to your Ages, so that spot can be replaced with the "journey bookmark" link, which doesn't exist in other books anyway. I do think that there should be a visual cue that in the Relto bookshelf the personal instance bookmark has a different function, and similarly that engaging the group bookmark in the leader's Relto book is tied to the other members' permissions.

My thinking has always been that Nexus is engineered as a beehive of small rooms with nexus terminals. Just as Gahreesen was designed with rotating buildings so that a person could not link in without risking being melded with a wall (except for the center), somehow Nexus was built so that the chances of two people linking to the same cell is infinitesimally small.

That's been my understanding as well. On the other hand, we may want to ask ourselves whether it should be possible for one person to accompany another to the Nexus. It would certainly make for a smoother introduction to the Nexus if Greeters could tag along, and add another way to share your library of links with another person.

[Baron]

For the sake of being consistent, should the Relto Bookshelf Books also take you to the public instance if you use the Linking Panel (making it super easy to attend a public party in Minkata, say), with Personal and Group bookmarks available, as with Books you'd find in the City?

Sounds great to me.

That starts to break away from the Yeesha story, and should remain as is, a book takes you to a private instance, or hood instance by default, as for example having 2000+ explorers jumping from Age to city and creating horrendous LAG, when doing the CGZM game, GZ game or multiple Age marker games

Well, it's going to be hard to get anywhere with "Cleaning Up Instancing" without making some changes. Any solution we choose is going to have to be at least partly different from things as they were. Alahmnat's suggestion has the advantage of being simple to explain and workable system-wide.

And, as long as public instances exist at all, there will be a danger of crowds forming in some of them.

The plan as posed here also brings the behavior of books closer to what the lore dictates. Having private instances as the default (i.e., linking panel) function of every book implies that Yeesha subjected her followers to a low-level hack that changes the behavior of every book they touch.

Your approach, on the other hand, does have the advantage of keeping lots of careless or clueless people from ending up in the public copy of the latest puzzle Age. If we implement the "linking panels lead to public instances" idea, we probably need a way to remind them there's an alternative.

How intolerable would a tooltip be?

Stones that link to the Neighborhood are a little tricker, but should follow the same concept... by default they take you to your 'hood... if you're part of a group, the group link takes you to the leader's 'hood instead.

Since there's no "one true hood" that would be the equivalent of the public hood, this makes sense.

I disagree, they should always take you to a public instance,

You're right! We actually could have a public instance of each hood, just to keep the scheme more consistent.

Since markers have absolute coordinates, it also makes more sense if there was "one true hood" for marker game purposes, too.

[Marten]

If the KI becomes smoothed out, my complaint might go away completely, but for the moment I do think a more ad-hoc, local way to start a small group wouldn't go amiss.

I think the best approach is to expect other things like the KI system also to be fixed to work better, and not try to cram a lot of utility into one aspect of the game's interface to make up for perceived failings in other parts of the interface. From the player's perspective, the game is a whole thing, and it needs to be cohesive.

[Grogyan]

Sorry, but to me Alahmnat's idea still just confuses me, and i've been playing for a long time

A public instance from stones to links to the hood you belong to, much like it is now.

Alahmnat: For the sake of being consistent, should the Relto Bookshelf Books also take you to the public instance if you use the Linking Panel (making it super easy to attend a public party in Minkata, say), with Personal and Group bookmarks available, as with Books you'd find in the City?


Sounds great to me.


That starts to break away from the Yeesha story, and should remain as is, a book takes you to a private instance, or hood instance by default, as for example having 2000+ explorers jumping from Age to city and creating horrendous LAG, when doing the CGZM game, GZ game or multiple Age marker games

I didn't quite word what I said there quite right and is confusing, a book from Relto takes you to a private or hood (or even party) instance, just like it is now

[Marten]

I still feel (strongly) we should make all links by default public, provide a way for the player to link privately or to group-organized instances when he or she wants, and don't worry about the population limit problem for now.

IF the population limit continues to be a problem (if it cannot be improved sufficiently) we could limit the number of people who can be in the public instance at one time. Ideally, such a workaround would include a queuing mechanism - something that Uru has been lacking all along. Any workaround is going to break somewhat the illusion that one is in a real place, so this is an approach we would only need to implement if we can't actually fix the population limit problem... but I don't want to spend a lot of time defining and detailing a workaround until we know it won't be wasted time and effort.

[realXCV]

There are ages I don't really see having a public instance (even by changing SDL and hiding stuff).
- Relto: Doesn't apply.
- Teledahn, Kadish, Gira, Er'cana, Gahreesen: Do you want to see the whole age then solve puzzles if you want or solve puzzles to see more ?
- Spyroom: Too small
- Pods ages: The only thing you can do there is waiting. Private instances of theses ages will no longer be necessary.
- Minkata: Depending on what changes you make.
- Kemo: Can be made public. But good luck carrying bugs to Gira.
- Neigborhoods: Doesn't apply for now.
- Delin, Tsogal: Can be made public if you insist (and if you kill hood instancing)
- Ahnonay, POTS Bahro caves: Nothing interesting in a public version.

If you make a public instance of every ages. Some ages will have two instancing models (a private Minkata and a public Mikata), others only one (a public Delin, forget the private Delin). In MOUL, Ae'gura is the only place with two instancing models (public and hood). Instead of confusing the players on "Is this place a private or a public instance", it will confuse them on "Can I have a private instance of this Age ?"

but I don't want to spend a lot of time defining and detailing a workaround until we know it won't be wasted time and effort.

Isn't that what we're doing with instancing ?

[Grogyan]

My proposal was to disable certain functions wuile in a public instance, there by only the general immediate area is explorable, like for example Kadish, you'd hide the cloths and disable the rotating door

[realXCV]

First, what's the purpose of having public instances of every ages?
- "It allows to explore the ages with friends" In that case, the whole age should be open. Not only the initial place. On the other hand, if you have access to the whole age then why having a private instance where you have the same thing plus a bunch of journey cloths.
- "To solve puzzle together". Once Teledahn is completely solved, the only thing you can do if you want to redo all the puzzles is to reset the age. How are you going to reset the public instance.
- "Because I like public instances". I don't know what to say.

It's also the "every linking book should link to a public instance". The Gira book in Kemo NEEDS to link to a private instance not a public instance. It also doesn't work with the idea that "only the general immediate area is explorable".

[Marten]

There are ages I don't really see having a public instance (even by changing SDL and hiding stuff).
...
- Pods ages: The only thing you can do there is waiting. Private instances of theses ages will no longer be necessary.

This is a contradictory statement. You don't see the Pods having public instances, but they should only be public?

If you make a public instance of every ages. Some ages will have two instancing models (a private Minkata and a public Mikata), others only one (a public Delin, forget the private Delin).

This too is a contradictory statement. Under my suggestion, the public Delin would have no Bahro door... so if you don't have a private Delin, you've just made it impossible to solve the Age. Players would still need to form a group to solve Delin. Unlike other Ages with puzzle elements that are persistent, the group would not need to solve the Age once for each player in the group; all members could run through the Bahro door and claim the reward.

In MOUL, Ae'gura is the only place with two instancing models (public and hood). Instead of confusing the players on "Is this place a private or a public instance", it will confuse them on "Can I have a private instance of this Age ?"

I made very clear in my proposal on the exceptions - they are minimal. No confusion. There are public and private versions of everything except your personal Relto (if there is a Phil's Relto, then it has public and private versions), Nexus (D'ni have engineered it so two people don't land in the same Nexus cell), and Neighborhoods (they are not considered instances from an IC point of view; "public" and "private" for these only defines if they are open to all players from the Nexus).

but I don't want to spend a lot of time defining and detailing a workaround until we know it won't be wasted time and effort.

Isn't that what we're doing with instancing ?

No. Instancing isn't a workaround for population limits. Instancing is a solution to allow every player the same opportunity to solve the puzzles and earn the associated rewards.

Following up on the two posts after that - I disagree with Grogyan about disabling the rotating door in Kadish. Parts of an Age that aren't part of Bahro or Yeesha tampering should be present and operating in public Ages (provided they have been restored by the DRC or whoever). Minkata presents a special challenge as that Age is so heavily modified by the Bahro, but I would expect the public Age of that to be absent all of the changes that the Bahro added. I'd like to see the public Ages all open for exploration - but keep the rewards reserved for solving the puzzles in the private Ages.

PS: For anyone that says, "But the public instances will spoil the puzzles!" - Yeah, and so does the internet.