[MUD-Dev] UO rants

[Ananda Dawnsinger]

> From: "Dave Rickey" <daver at mythicgames.com>
> Reply-To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 09:56:01 -0400
> To: <mud-dev at kanga.nu>
> Subject: Re: [MUD-Dev] UO rants
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Mihaly <the_logos at achaea.com>
> To: mud-dev at kanga.nu <mud-dev at kanga.nu>
> Date: Sunday, August 27, 2000 6:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [MUD-Dev] UO rants
> 
>> Why is that important though? Take a mass of people, give them something
>> to compete about. Watch how quickly they form into clear-cut teams.
>> 
> Watch how quickly the bandwagon of the winning team gathers steam,
> rolling over and absorbing all opposition.

Watch how long it takes before a powerful enough leader gets sick of the
status quo and organizes effective opposition.

I've seen this cycle happen in three different games now.  However, in all
three cases, the "winning team" that was overthrown had distinct grief
tendencies.  I'm not sure you can mount effective opposition against an
established "winner" who's mature enough to play fair and share the wealth.

A couple of things I've noticed in this regard:

Rule #1: Any game that isn't biased toward statism is by definition biased
toward anarchy.

Rule #2: Unless civilized conduct is specifically selected for, atavism will
have the clear and obvious early advantage.  Civilized conduct will tend to
win out in the long run, but at a very high emotional cost.

  -- Sharon




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev