Posts: 614
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2005
Locke didn't get much attention from players, at least not initially. This would not be the case if Sullla was playing....
For lurkers, I agree with what you said. But why does it matter, Sullla would not know about lurker discussion until the end....
Gold Ergo Sum Wrote:Yeah, I must disagree with the POV that Locke didn't get attention because he was new. Locke was easily the most popular player in this game. The Locke thread just didn't have enough posts or content to keep people coming back over and over again. If Locke had updated as regularly as Spulla in Pb2, I think the thread views would've been the highest again. Also, even from an early date, you will see that many lurkers recognized Locke as a player with interesting opinions and a good handle on the game. So I think it was more lack of content than lack of name that led to less attention.
Mwin
Posts: 3,143
Threads: 21
Joined: Oct 2009
Great job, Sullla. Of course I also don't agree to everything you've said. 
[SIZE="1"]Isn't it time to stop your personal vendetta against me? I'm getting a bit tired of it....[/SIZE]
Posts: 23,419
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
scooter Wrote:Considering you didn't say hardly anything negative about Locke in the lurker thread all game long, I have a seriously hard time believing you actually knew about it. 
That's harsh.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 15,153
Threads: 111
Joined: Apr 2007
MWIN Wrote:Locke didn't get much attention from players, at least not initially. This would not be the case if Sullla was playing....
For lurkers, I agree with what you said. But why does it matter, Sullla would not know about lurker discussion until the end....
Stat time.
Locke's thread had 112 posts in it. Locke only posted 53 times in that thread... So 52.6% of the posts in his thread were lurker comments.
So let's consider Lord Parkin's thread - whose thread was easily the most popular in terms of lurker comments - he had more ded-lurkers than anyone, and his comprehensive style drew a lot of comments. His thread had 1,076 posts in it, and LP accounted for an amazing 733 of them. That means lurker comments in his thread only accounted for 31.8% of all his posts...
So I think it's pretty safe to argue that if "Locke" had posted with the frequency of LP, his thread would've easily had the most viewcounts and lurker comments... So I don't think it's fair to say that Locke got ignored at all... And like has been said - he was wildly popular in the lurker thread... His blunt and unorthodox way of talking and his go-to "LOL" just killed me and made me laugh pretty frequently.
Edit:
Krill Wrote:That's harsh.
Really? Wasn't intended to be... twas a joke.
Posts: 4,272
Threads: 38
Joined: Jun 2011
I just caught back up with the post game thread - I can safely say my mind has been blown.
Posts: 1,716
Threads: 10
Joined: Oct 2009
Wow.. I did notice you weren't around Sulla, but I figured you were playing LoL or something. A nice reveal there. 
Also, love the name Parkin Violation. Shame I didn't get an invitation..
Anyway, despite turning in a dud of a game, in the end it was an enjoyable experience and I'd like to thank all of you (players, lurkers, mapmakers and of course GES as admin). I'll see about writing up some more thoughts when I have some more time available.
We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 23,419
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
scooter Wrote:Really? Wasn't intended to be... twas a joke.
Yeah, but still, that one's pretty close to the bone.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 3,140
Threads: 26
Joined: Feb 2009
Just on the lurkers thing: Locke's was the only thread I read semi regularly in this game aside from the lurkers thread. I saw a lot of positive stuff about his posting style, comparing it to Rorschach which piqued my curiosity.
I enjoyed the thread. It was blunt and funny. I was thinking it was an affected personality, but a homage to a character rather than a deliberate disguise.
Sullla Wrote:(I think this is conclusive proof that name reputation was a gigantic factor in Pitboss #2, and all that stuff that other people wrote about "not targeting Spullla because of names" was a giant pile of bull, but I'll leave that up to individual interpretation.)
Change your presentation and you change your diplomacy. Massively.
Name recognition is obviously a factor. But so is how you express your thoughts and ideas to other teams. Maybe you've just happened on a more effective diplomatic technique to enact the same sort of diplomatic strategy? Or maybe you're right and it's all in the name.
Posts: 445
Threads: 1
Joined: Jan 2011
Hope to see more polished, summarized version of the game experience some time in future at your website!
Posts: 4,416
Threads: 34
Joined: Dec 2010
A few instant thoughts upon reading the start of Sullla's post (haven't read any further yet):
1.
2. I did wonder why I never saw any comments from Sullla in any of the threads. (You can check who's posted by clicking the "replies" link.) At one point I was going to ask if he had any interest whatsoever in following the game. Now it makes sense.
3. I was literally JUST ABOUT to make a post about how Locke had been overly rude in his comments (multiple times calling me "noob", "stupid", and "dumb")... and yet for the most part everyone applauded him while hating on me. I'd like to point out that despite my confident and assertive writing style (at least in my thread) which apparently rubbed some people the wrong way, I'm pretty sure I never insulted anyone. I did critique some moves I thought were foolish, but I was always careful to keep it friendly. Just goes to show.
4. Perhaps it's too general an observation, but it seems that while the lurkers are always hungry for new posts, they aren't particularly appreciative of them when they are frequent. In fact, as an overgeneralisation, I'd say that the less you post, the more intrigued and supportive the audience becomes - while when you actually post regularly, they tend to become more judgmental and derisive. There, I said it... feel free to tell me how wrong I am.
5. I was considering whether to invite Sullla to play in the next game so we could have a showdown - I think this was suggested by a few lurkers at some point too. However, I guess that's kind of redundant now, heh. 
6. I was also just about to carefully go through and post an overall critique of everyone's games and the things they could have done better. I'd actually already read Locke's whole thread since it was one of the shorter ones, and had some comments prepared. I'm sure no-one will take me seriously now that they know it was the great Sullla who was playing, but oh well. Basically, while I thought you guys played a strong overall game, I thought you played too conservatively - failing to take any risks which might have helped push you ahead. For instance, as far as I can tell you never made an attempt at any wonder aside from general musings about the Taj, and your attack on Adlain was IMHO far too late. There are other things too, but I'm sure no-one wants to hear more about me telling Sullla how to play the game, at least now that they know who he actually is.
|
