PARTICRACY CULTURE REFORMS CONSULTATION

General discussions about the Particracy web game.

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby jamescfm » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:25 pm

FPC wrote:The map displays only the majority etnic groups in each region

I'd like to emphasise this point. At present, this "culture map" is the primary method used for communicating the proposed cultural breakdown to players but I recommend that as time goes on, Moderation prepare draft culture breakdowns (such as the example FPC provided) to add some further nuance to the overall picture.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 2083
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby jamescfm » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:45 pm

On an unrelated note, the current version of the map using the definitions treats Narik as German and Darnussian as Dutch, this was previously the other way around but was apparently switched at some point. Would it be reasonable to swap this back?
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 2083
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Auditorii » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:49 pm

jamescfm wrote:On an unrelated note, the current version of the map using the definitions treats Narik as German and Darnussian as Dutch, this was previously the other way around but was apparently switched at some point. Would it be reasonable to swap this back?


I think due to immense RP done this would be more than agreeable.
"The Aldegar Canal, best canal, super watery and the best canal. I know canals. Theyre great. My dad went to Canal IT, he knew all about them. Very smart man. Canal expert. Aldegar canal. Best canal. Anyone else is fake canal news!"
~Vescia
Auditorii
 
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby FPC » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:55 pm

jamescfm wrote:
FPC wrote:The map displays only the majority etnic groups in each region

I'd like to emphasise this point. At present, this "culture map" is the primary method used for communicating the proposed cultural breakdown to players but I recommend that as time goes on, Moderation prepare draft culture breakdowns (such as the example FPC provided) to add some further nuance to the overall picture.



Thanks for bringing this up, we have started work on those and aim to have them out by the end of next week at the latest
Used to be a mod xx current Temporary mod
Wiki Admin and Bureaucrat (for some reason)
User avatar
FPC
 
Posts: 744
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 6:14 am
Location: Scotland

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Wed Jan 24, 2018 2:44 am

Earlier today I spent some time researching statistics regarding player numbers (as in players with seats) in different types of nations in the game. The findings were quite interesting, and I would like to share them. At least a few others, I am sure, will enjoy pondering over the results, the methodology and so on.

To begin with, I divided the nations into 4 main categories, these being:

CULTURALLY PROTECTED NATIONS WITH ENGLISH CULTURES

Nations - 8
Total players - 38
Average players per nation - 4.75

Indian/Afro-Caribbean Malivia included here, as allows English character names.

Unsurprisingly, these are doing well in terms of average player numbers, although as it happens, not quite as well as I expected. Perhaps a temporary lull in numbers in some of these nations?


CULTURALLY OPEN NATIONS WITH A PREDOMINANT ENGLISH THEME

Nations - 6
Total players - 35
Average players per nation - 5.83

These tend to have English nation names, character names, constitutional titles etc. Interestingly, on average they are doing even better than the CPd English nations, making them the best performing category of all.


CULTURALLY PROTECTED NATIONS WITH NON-ENGLISH CULTURES

Nations - 35
Total players - 108
Average players per nation - 3.09

For those like myself who love playing in CPd non-English nations, I would say there is some surprisingly encouraging news amongst the figures in this category, with quite a few nations doing very well and much better than they have done in the past. However, unsurprisingly, it remains very much the case that on average these nations tend to have lower player numbers than the English nations.


CULTURALLY OPEN NATIONS WITH A PREDOMINANT NON-ENGLISH THEME

Nations - 9
Total players - 24
Average players per nation - 2.67

These are the kind of places where although English character names etc. are not forbidden, a quick glance at the nation suggests most informed players wanting to RP an English party would probably not choose to go there, due to features such as non-English party names, nation titles, constitutional titles, character names etc. Most of these nations once had a Cultural Protocol matching the currently RPed culture.

This category performs poorest of all in terms of player number averages.



***

Now lets add the English CP nations to the English Open nations to form an "ENGLISH NATIONS" category. And lets also add the non-English CPs to the non-English Open nations in order to form a "NON-ENGLISH NATIONS" category. This gives us...

ENGLISH NATIONS (CPd and OPEN)

Nations - 14
Total players - 73
Players per nation - 5.21


NON-ENGLISH NATIONS (CPd and OPEN)

Nations - 44
Total players - 132
Players per nation - 3


As we can see, whilst the majority of players (with seats) are in non-English nations, a very significant minority, 36%, are in English nations. However, this 36% minority are squeezed into just 24% of the nations (14 out of 58). By contrast, the 64% of players who play in non-English nations enjoy 76% of the nations for themselves (44 out of 58).

That's not such an injustice or a bad thing, many of you will probably think. After all, isn't it nice to have some diversity of cultures in the game?

But here's the thing...the Cultural Map which Moderation is now proposing to introduce would decrease the number of English nations from 14 to just 7, and increase the number of non-English nations from 44 to 51. Doing the numbers again, this would be equivalent to squeezing 36% of the players into just 12% of the nations, and allowing the 64% of non-English party players to spread out over 88% of the nations.

Most of you will have guessed what my argument is going to be before I have made it: in its current form, the Cultural Map is squeezing the English party players too far.

Of course, I appreciate the argument that over time, some nations will opt-out of the Global Role-Play Accord and become essentially Culturally Open, but nevertheless, on the day these new rules come in, this is what the new Cultural Map will look like - 51 non-English nations and just 7 English nations. Also, to be honest, I am concerned that even if the opt-out is introduced, scrapping it will soon become the next item on the agenda.

This, I hope, is something not only the Moderators, but all those who care for the long-term interests of the game, will give pause to reflect on.

By the way, the stats I collected are listed below, and I encourage anyone who is interested enough to browse them and check them etc.

CULTURALLY PROTECTED NATIONS WITH ENGLISH CULTURES

Hutori - 7
Kalistan - 4
Kirlawa - 3
Likatonia - 5
Luthori - 4

Malivia - 4
Mordusia - 5
Rutania - 6


CULTURALLY OPEN NATIONS WITH A PREDOMINANT ENGLISH THEME

Baltusia - 6
Beluzia - 6
Hobrazia - 4
Lodamun - 6
Solentia - 8

Vorona - 5


CULTURALLY PROTECTED NATIONS WITH NON-ENGLISH CULTURES

Aldegar - 1
Alduria - 4
Aloria - 3
Badara - 3
Barmenia - 4

Beiteynu - 1
Cobura - 3
Deltaria - 1
Dorvik - 4
Dranland - 3

Dundorf - 4
Egelion - 6
Endralon - 3
Hawu Mumenhes - 2
Hulstria - 4

Indrala - 7
Istalia - 7
Jakania - 4
Jelbania - 1
Kafuristan - 2

Kalopia - 3
Kazulia - 4
Keymon - 3
Kundrati - 1
Lourenne - 1

New Endralon - 1
Rildanor - 1
Saridan - 3
Sekowo - 4
Selucia - 3

Trigunia - 2
Tukarali - 3
Valruzia - 5
Vanuku - 2
Zardugal - 4


CULTURALLY OPEN NATIONS WITH A PREDOMINANT NON-ENGLISH THEME

Cildania - 2
Davostan - 3
Darnussia - 3
Dolgava - 1
Gaduridos - 4

Kanjor - 2
Pontesi - 2
Talmoria - 2
Telamon - 5
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby jamescfm » Wed Jan 24, 2018 6:10 am

Correlation does not equal causation.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 2083
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Reddy » Wed Jan 24, 2018 6:22 am

jamescfm wrote:Correlation does not equal causation.


Haha, best of luck trying to explain that. I only tried like 3 or 4 times in the other thread. There was a time when Moderation was very inactive and cultural protocols were not being enforced (there were a great deal more Anglo and CP-open nations then), we had like 140-150 players or so. Nowadays cultural protocols are enforced very actively and we have double the player base. I also question the methodology. Player numbers in a country at any given moment are possibly the unreliable way to try and gauge anything since they are remarkably unstable. A country can literally go from one to eight players in a matter of seconds.

But y'know, this is the kind of thing I'm always talking about. We end up bogged down on very minute details. Let's very, very generously assume that this "research" is valid, what's the proposed solution again? How would it affect the proposed Culture Map?
Reddy
 
Posts: 3742
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:20 am

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:30 am

jamescfm wrote:Correlation does not equal causation.


Could you say some more about what you mean?

Reddy wrote:I also question the methodology. Player numbers in a country at any given moment are possibly the unreliable way to try and gauge anything since they are remarkably unstable. A country can literally go from one to eight players in a matter of seconds.


Almost all observers who have followed the game close enough for long enough would agree there is a strong general tendency for English nations to have more players than non-English nations. As you say, player numbers in different nations do go up and down, but nevertheless, the general trend I described tends to ring true. Also, from my own observation, I would say that really big fluctuations in players numbers tend to be more common in the non-English nations than the English nations. This may be partly due to us players who like to RP non-English parties having a general increased tendency to move from nation to nation a lot.

Reddy wrote:Let's very, very generously assume that this "research" is valid


I spent some time on the exercise and did my best to be conscientious.

Reddy wrote:what's the proposed solution again? How would it affect the proposed Culture Map?


My argument is that if Moderation is going to strip away our existing Cultural Protocol privileges and impose a subjectively-determined Cultural Map on us, then more allowance ought to be made for the English party players than has been included in the current proposal.

So far as I can tell from the currently proposed Cultural Map, here is how the English nations and English-parties-allowed nations are going to be affected (and I think I recall Polites confirming these on the thread that was removed, although Mods please by all means double-check my lists - I strongly plea with you to do so, in fact). The ones in red are the ones that are going to be assigned a non-English culture.

CULTURALLY PROTECTED NATIONS WITH ENGLISH CULTURES
(Malivia included due to allowance of English character names. Is this still the case under the new map? Not 100% sure on this one...)

Hutori
Kalistan
Kirlawa
Likatonia
Luthori
Malivia (?)
Mordusia
Rutania



CULTURALLY OPEN NATIONS WITH A PREDOMINANT ENGLISH THEME

Baltusia
Beluzia
Hobrazia
Lodamun
Solentia
Vorona



CULTURALLY OPEN NATIONS WITH A PREDOMINANT NON-ENGLISH THEME
(ie. English parties allowed under rules, but might potentially feel a bit "odd" or uncomfortable there due to non-English aspects to the current set-up)

Cildania
Davostan
Darnussia
Dolgava
Gaduridos
Kanjor
Pontesi
Talmoria
Telamon


There is, I hope it will be appreciated, a big sea of red amongst those nations, representing a significant incursion into the playing space of the very significant minority of players who want to play the game as English parties.

All I am saying is, if we really are going to get a Moderation-imposed Cultural Map (which I personally have grave doubts about), could we at least consider reducing the scale of this incursion?
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby jamescfm » Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:22 am

Phil Piratin wrote:
jamescfm wrote:Correlation does not equal causation.


Could you say some more about what you mean?

I mean to say that identifying a correlation between two variables does not indicate a causal relationship between them. In the same sense that you have identified English nations, I could quite as easily observe that Italian nations have an average of 8 players, far higher than the average of non-Italian nations. By this logic, we shouldn’t be forcing Italian players into this restricted player space and should create several more Italian nations.

The popularity of English nations is the result of numerous factors and not, as you seem to suggest, because there are a group of players who just don’t want to play in non-English nations. But even if we accept your premise, that there are players who would simply be unable to play the game if there are no English nations, you haven’t presented any proposals about which nations should be changed on the map. I encourage you to do so, that’s the purpose of this thread after all.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 2083
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Polites » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:49 am

We are working on increasing the number of English-speaking nations, and we will also provide the nation descriptions soon.

As for the impact of English nations on total player numbers, it is hard to tell whether other factors may also have an impact, and whether switching from English to another language would drive down the player number.
Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises,
Cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum
Polites
 
Posts: 2751
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest