Well since we're throwing suggestions out, and we've got LBMA and MLMA why not
HLMA - High Level Mission Arc
For 40+ arcs. These would denote a challenge level appropriate to a high-level character or team and narrow the search for people who don't feel like exemping.
The more suggestions people throw out the more I'm agreeing the devs need to implement some kind of inherent tagging system. How is anyone ever going to remember all of these?
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
change the reward based to simply "AWIP" that would be for all work in progress. this would allow people to test their arcs and receive rewards while testing. and any arc not polished enough for reviews just yet could be put here. "cough moo cough"
SMVA and HLMA work for me. They're very straightforward.
I also agree with categorizing -- we have similar groupings of tags already -- and that it's up to the author to decide how specifically and extensively they want to tag. None of these are mandatory. It's up to the author to self-identify and how far they want to take it.
Global @Twoflower / MA Creator & Pro Indie Game Developer.
Mission Architect Works: DIY Laser Moonbase (Dev Choice!), An Internship in the Fine Art of Revenge (2009 MA Award Winner!) and many more! Plus Brand New Arcs for Issue 21!
[ QUOTE ]
[VFHA] Villain-for-Hire Arc. Your character is brought in to work for the contact as hired help.
[VMMA] Villainous Mastermind Arc. (this needs a better name.) Your character is self-directed with their own goals, contact helps you instead.
[/ QUOTE ]
How about [VSMA] for Villainous Self-Motivated Arc. Your character is their own contact!
It also doesn't return any results right now.
Edit: Missed that post on [SMVA].
These are good ideas but...
you're introducing a whole codeset that people have to learn, and the only place they can pick it up is in the forums. I agree that searches for "story" in a keyword type search will allow stuff like: "this is my farm mish it has no real story". However, the searcher can filter these things out.
I have used tags in blogs for years and I learned to keep things simple. I also learned that tags/keywords lists will grow with every user.
For English searches I would suggest tags like these:
solofriendly
lowlevel
storybased
defeatall
eliteboss
...and so on. If a person types in "story" the search engine in the MA will pick up on "story" and should pick up anything you label as storybased.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The tags aren't a bad idea, but how do you define your missions? I have an arc with an EB/AV in 4 of the 5 missions, but it's very story-based and not meant as a pro challenge (you always have an ally along to help). Is it tough if you go after that optional AV at the end? Absolutely, but that's for story-based reasons and you can skip him anyway.
That's why I'd like to see a dev system, too. Otherwise it's going to be like "[blah][blah][blah]oh crap i'm out of room for my arc's actual name"
[/ QUOTE ]
You have an EB/AV in four out of the five missions and you don't consider it a pro challenge?
[/ QUOTE ]
All but one are really easy to beat and you have an ally for every one of them.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I wouldn't consider that a Pro Challenge either. Two of my Arcs have AVs and every time there are optional Allies designed to help you fight them.
If there were no Allies then it'd be considered a Pro Challenge.
[ QUOTE ]
If you're going to do this, can you please strike off the "-MA" extension? It's unnecessary, we all know it's a mission arc, and for some of us, having to insert five acronyms in order to be recognized might push us over the 100% mark for publishing.
So, if someone had an arc that would qualify for all of the above, it could read:
[ SF LB PC TF ] or +SF +LB +PC +TF
vs:
[SFMA] [LBMA] [PCMA] [TFMA]
...which basically nearly doubles the character length.
I'll add my own suggestions on this later if this takes flight. Thanks.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is necessary a lot of the time if the specific two letter combos can be found in other words. you need to at a minimum make usre the combos of letters occur nowhere else. MAYBE SFM/LBM/PCM would do it, and if so, I will agree with you - drop the "A" - it is not needed:
SFM = Story Focused Missions
RBM = Reward Based Missions
etc
For Great Justice!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Edit: I don't think striking the MA will work. Remember, this is to make an adequately long and obscure combo of letters that you can search on. Searching on two letters is more prone to false positives. It's either the whole tag or no tag, to maintain consistency.
[/ QUOTE ]
I threw in another version after you posted that addresses that, TwoF. I think the inclusion of a "+" prefix (or any other uncommon grammatical character, like ~ or <
is a fair compromise between querying and character conservation.
[/ QUOTE ]
As long as FIRST we make SURE that their search system treat +XX different from just plain XX - many search engines ignore special characters. Has this been tested?
For Great Justice!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I suggest you also incorporate
[FARM] - For All, Reasonable Missions ... To denote arcs which could be played by anyone... :P
[/ QUOTE ]
I wanted to briefly comment on this. I have no problem coming up with a tag that designates farms. As someone mentioned above, it needs to be an acronym that would not be likely to show up as otherwise legit text. However, I can't see a case where anyone would use it, from the author side. It would be like painting a big red sign on your mission that said "Ban Me" (maybe the tag could be BMMA ). Don't get me wrong, I do think that players would love to have such a tag so that they could find (or avoid) those missions. I just don't see it getting used unless the devs were to define what was an "allowable farm". In other words, don't hold your breath 
[/ QUOTE ]
You MUST differentiate between two different kinds of missions - because if you don't, you are basically claiming that the devs don't know the difference, which isn't very nice in my opinion.
There are missions that BREAK the rules in the pursuit of rewards. These are the ones being banned.
There are missions that DO NOT break the rules in the pursuit of rewards. I have not yet seen any of these be banned.
We OBVIOUSLY do NOT need a tag for the former. But we must be CRYSTAL clear that ANY tag we create for the latter is NOT intended for use by rule-breakers. We CANNOT lump those two very different categories of missions in the same basket, any more than it is right to lump in people who like stories and the emo crowd. Its a slur and a slander, and nothing more than discrimination, and possibly even harassment.
As far as I know, it is NOT rule breaking to pursue game rewards intelligently and effectively. Neither is it rule breaking to ignore rewards and focus on the narrative of the mission.
Maybe if both kinds of players don't attack the other, that would be a good start. Maybe we ought to all agree that as long as we aren't breaking rules, we aren't doing anything wrong - that people who could care less about rewards are not better or worse than people who could care less about narrative text.
It needs to start by fixing the original post
The perception that Rewards based gaming is breaking the rules is WRONG and it is DAMAGING.
Greyhawke, if you want to do the right thing, you need to EDIT your original post at the top - your responsibility is ever greater now that you have been stickied.
It now unfortunately says:
[RBMA] - Rewards Based Mission Arc (Use at your own risk. Don't blame me if the GMs ban your arc)
Why slur both the devs and the players who wish to play by pursuing effective (and permitted) reward options ?
It would be better, fairer to both players who prioritize rewards and to the devs themselves (why assuming they would unfairly punish non-rule-breakers? I am sure they can see the difference between an exploit and play-choice.):
[RBMA] - Rewards Based Mission Arc (Intended ONLY for valid rule-abiding missions that prioritize rewards, NOT for missions with exploits, which will get banned)
That's much clearer and much less of an implied attack on either the devs ability to see the difference or the player's choice to pursue permitted rewards.
Make sense?
For Great Justice!
[ QUOTE ]
Also good with [RBMA]. I think it'll be a fine way to say "Mods, come annihilate me!" but hey. Caveat author.
[/ QUOTE ]
...and is this the *guy* - the one who says "people who pursue XPz are EBIL and they should be STOPPED so me and my emo friends can act out our drama ambitions"? Is this the guy who says, "You can play CoX any way you like so long as me and my friend approve"?
Or does he just believe the devs are incapable of making the distinction between rewards based missions that obey the rules, and missions that break the rules?
Guesses?
For Great Justice!
O NOEZ you have found my hypocracy I will kill myself.
I'm JOKING, okay? I'm fine with the tag because it's a fun way to commit suicide. Get over yourself and let's get back to being productive here coming up with tags.
Global @Twoflower / MA Creator & Pro Indie Game Developer.
Mission Architect Works: DIY Laser Moonbase (Dev Choice!), An Internship in the Fine Art of Revenge (2009 MA Award Winner!) and many more! Plus Brand New Arcs for Issue 21!
To be fair? I think I can agree with Metatron on the use of the [RBMA] tag as a legitimate tag with a non-farm arc that allows players to pursue rewards as they had been intended. Though, I do think his posts could have done without the hostile undertones.
My current project's designed as a task force. Currently, it features 1 captive, 5 allies, 41 interactable objects, 1 destroy object, 9 custom enemies, and a crapton of optional bosses (which I believe count as optional objectives; correct me if I'm wrong) spread amonst the missions to make the enemy groups feel a little more legitimate.
I'll admit, that's not a HUGE amount of grinding towards many of the badges featured within the MA. However, I could see how someone designing a serious arc could take badges further into consideration. In such an event, if they wanted to use the [RBMA] as one of their tags, more power to them.
Also, I don't think anyone who's going to acknowledge the usefulness for these tags is actually ignorant enough to go ahead and paint such a target to their forehead. Of course, if any of you really would wanna do that, then... I guess I'm wrong?
There is nothing wrong with going for rewards in a legitimate way. We can tell the difference between a legitimate RBMA and a farm. So can the devs.
The problem comes from the "don't tell me how to play" crowd that thinks their farm IS a legitimate Rewards-Based Mission Arc. So your "Defeat a bunch of Rikti on a big map" will get lumped in with their "Defeat a bunch of Comm Officers on a big map."
Go read the thread about the missions that got banned for having "Farm" in the description and turned out to be about a bunch of farm animals. I'm not saying don't use the tag, just don't be surprised if your perfectly legitimate arc gets pulled.
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
I've also got no problems with a legitimately challenging RBMA, one which offers up massive bang to go with the massive buck.
But if the devs clue into our tags, you can believe they are gonna scrutinize any arc tagged RBMA because it ALSO can and will be be misinterpreted as "farm". So, as noted, caveat author. Be careful, dude. Use it wisely and go in peace; use it poorly and suffer.
Global @Twoflower / MA Creator & Pro Indie Game Developer.
Mission Architect Works: DIY Laser Moonbase (Dev Choice!), An Internship in the Fine Art of Revenge (2009 MA Award Winner!) and many more! Plus Brand New Arcs for Issue 21!
I'm not saying that all RBMA arcs are 'farms' in the negative sense. I am saying that the GMs, once they pick up on our tagging system, may ban an arc with that tag without even looking at it. It happens now, with 'farm' in the description, so my concern is that it will quickly become the kiss of death.
Give me a quick and concise way to get that same point across and I will change the description. Or, if you have a suggestion for a separate tag more appropriate I'm open to that.
I'd suggest...
[RBMA] - Rewards Based Mission Arc (Use at your own risk. For legitimate arcs only.)
I honestly doubt anything's gonna go overboard about it. The "Joke Farm" thing, I can understand. With the number of people who created such arcs as soon as i14 hit live? The joke got reeeeeally old, reeeeeeally fast.
Added VSMA and HLMA. Changed the formatting and added categories. Changed the RBMA description and added a note for clarification.
I saw a couple of people already using [HFMA] for Humor Focused Mission Arc. Sounds like a good one to me. Anyone else have thoughts on that?
HFMA works for me. We need a good comedy tag and it does keep the "focus mission arc" paradigm ball rolling. Maybe add it with a companion tag of DFMA, for dramatic?
Global @Twoflower / MA Creator & Pro Indie Game Developer.
Mission Architect Works: DIY Laser Moonbase (Dev Choice!), An Internship in the Fine Art of Revenge (2009 MA Award Winner!) and many more! Plus Brand New Arcs for Issue 21!
For the 'Villain For Hire" What about FHMA for For Hire Mission Arc. Its most often used for villains, I am sure, but I know some mercenary heroes as well.
I think this is going to be very useful. I've scanned through the first few pages of this forum, and though I've seen at least a suggestion or two on ways to lable "funny" arcs, I would rather have a listing for 'Humor' rather than 'Comedy'. To me, Humor means it's got some funny stuff, whereas Comedy means the main point is the silliness. I'm sure others wouldn't make the same distinction, or see any difference in the terms.
In any event, at least as I started typing this Greyhawke didn't have a term yet for any sort of comedy/humor designation, so...
May I suggest: [ACHU] For "Arc Contains Humor"
(Hmm... after typing this, I realized the Pokemon danger, so a couple of other possibilities)
Or: [HCIA] for "Humorous Content In Arc"
Or: [SOHI] for "Sense of Humor Included"
Great discussion and ideas! I'm at work, but have to chime in.
[ QUOTE ]
I have used tags in blogs for years and I learned to keep things simple. I also learned that tags/keywords lists will grow with every user.
For English searches I would suggest tags like these:
solofriendly
lowlevel
storybased
defeatall
eliteboss
[/ QUOTE ]
Those are excellent points, and we need people who already have experience like you for guidance.
I also note that your suggestions are much more understandable than the cryptic 4 letter abbreviations. If a tag system is going to be widely adopted it would really help if it was immediately comprehensible. Consider these two strings:
1: [LBMA][RBMA][TFMA]
2: (lowlevel)(rewardsbased)(teamfocused)
Yes, it takes a few more characters, but which one easier to understand?
I am assuming these tags will go in the 1000 character mission description since they are going to be searched on. Using 20 to 50 additional characters is a fair tradeoff for the tremendous gain in accessibility.
[ QUOTE ]
There are missions that BREAK the rules in the pursuit of rewards. These are the ones being banned.
[/ QUOTE ]
Certainly there are a few critters which were allowed in the MA that gave an unfair advantage, such as the Shield Generators. Everyone expected those to be removed, and they were.
Other than mistakes like that I don't think the "rules" are clear at all, although I seem to be in the minority. I have seen other people claim that obvious violations of the rules are 1) hoards of low-level minions, and 2) lots of EBs and AVs.
I watched a strange argument in a PUG in which person A insisted "this mission is obviously a farm and should be reported" and person B said "I wrote this mission, and I did my best to create an interesting villain group with great costumes and powers." Person B eventually convinced A about their good intentions, but person A would most certainly have reported the mission if they had played it on their own.
I expect the devs to design the MA to enforce whatever rules make sense, not to ask me to remember a separate list of rules for what they intended. So far the only explicit rule is not to use the word "farm" anywhere in the mission.
[ QUOTE ]
The perception that Rewards based gaming is breaking the rules is WRONG and it is DAMAGING.
[/ QUOTE ]
I completely agree, and well said. As someone who has been playing the game since the beginning, I really want to get my characters up to level 20 as quickly as possible. I don't need to listen to another lecture from somebody who bought the game last week that I "need to slow down and enjoy the game for what it is." I understand their perspective and don't bother to argue, but wish they wouldn't try to convince my that I'm wrong for not wanting to read every line of text for the 50th time.
[ QUOTE ]
I am assuming these tags will go in the 1000 character mission description since they are going to be searched on. Using 20 to 50 additional characters is a fair tradeoff for the tremendous gain in accessibility.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's only 300 characters. I WISH it were 1000 characters.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am assuming these tags will go in the 1000 character mission description since they are going to be searched on. Using 20 to 50 additional characters is a fair tradeoff for the tremendous gain in accessibility.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's only 300 characters. I WISH it were 1000 characters.
[/ QUOTE ]
This. That 300 character limit is what's making folks try to be more creative with them. Until the devs put in a baked in tagging system (which is likely to take up part of our filesize, drat!) then we have to squeeze as much into that 300 as we can (including our actual description!!!)
Kung Ru - 50++ MA/Regen Scrapper
Kalleesta - 50 Necro/Dark MM
Hidden Justice - 44 Kin/Psy Defender
Altaholic
Shoot, that's what comes from posting from memory.
An alternative would be for the Search function to include the longer 1000 character Mission Text field, or whatever it's called. But a baked in tagging system would be best.
[SMVA] Self-Motivated Villainy Arc? It gets away from the 'MA' ending, but maybe that's ok.
I am curious if we want to start putting Tags in categories. Here are the Challenge Level Tags (LBMA/MLMA), here are the Mission Archetype Tags(SFMA/PCMA/RBMA), etc. Then, consider putting more specific sub-tags as desired under the appropriate tag, such as adding the CMDA tag under the SFMA.
I do think its possible to get too specific with your tagging, but should that be something left to the author to risk? If they tag specific without also tagging general, they would be the one risking missing a broader audience.