Themebuilds and what to do with them

[TheStephen]

I'm sure the build team have had this discussion before, but I'm just curious on people's thoughts/reasons it's not been done before: Is it possible to use good (and finished obvs) themebuilds as placeholders for non-existent/expired projects in mainworld?
E.g. Orruss did a rather nice Emyn Beraid (mine wasn't too shabby either), which is certainly better than the existing mainworld build. This isn't to say it couldn't be redone along with terrain when the area is actually started as a proper project.

Small scale would maybe work for this: Beorns house, Rhosgobel etc... Which is obviously something possible in themebuild plots.

Would this be too much effort? Would it encourage people to actually finish themebuilds? What obstacles are there to this working? Interested to hear the build teams (and everyone else's) thoughts on this,

 

[junoknight]

I love the idea - there are so many locations around the server that are very low hanging fruit for improvement - even temporary, as you say.

An expansion on the idea is that there are a lot of smaller far-flung places in the world that won't get individual attention for a long time, so why not put some of the better theme builds out there too?

Good way to get the community more involved. Love it.

 

[EffieFrog]

I want to see Rwyland's Lake Town as a place holder. Big yes to this idea, I see nothing wrong with it.

 

[Melkor_Belegurth]

I love the idea, it'll make more people interested in trying out theme builds if there's a chance their build will temporarily be added to the map, they will also put more effort to it.

Adding to that it could fill up a lot of empty spaces in the map, next time when people will warp to Lake Town, for example, they will see Rwyland's Lake Town instead of just an empty space, even if it's tinyer then the actual one, it'll still be much more fun to look around those places.

It could even get more people into the community, knowing there's a chance their theme build will temporarily (could be for a few years) added to the map, they will log on much more, getting Commoner by doing so and ranking up, getting our community bigger then ever.

Absolutely love the idea.

 

[draonic_slayer]

Hey Stephen, we have discussed this before within Staff as this was raised to possibly help increase engagement with building on MCME. This was around the time that it was brought up that Commoners do not really have that much to do with building on the Mainmap of MCME , for context.

To me there are several issues that come with this Idea:

• One, people asking why we have not done anything else around these pasted in theme builds, say Beorn's house, it would be in the middle of uncompleted terrain with no surrounding builds. Currently, it is easy to say that we have not done anything in that entire area of the map and can leave it at that, whereas this idea would mean that people would be continuously asking why we have random builds dotted across our map.

• Secondly, Theme builds are extremely inconsistent in both their styles and their size, for example Laketown, you would only be able to get a small section and it would look extremely awkward on its own, leading back to point one about people asking why it is not all finished in that area. Additionally, styles would be miss matched for similar regions seeing as these are small scale “concepts”. This is extremely against how we handle projects on MCME currently, with the aim to complete a whole area/region in a cohesive style.

• Another issue is how would it be decided what is good and what is not, at the end of the day the responsibility would lie either upon the Designers or the Head Builder. We still need to maintain our high standard that we have set, even if it would be a placeholder. This would bring even more pressure upon us to actively watch Theme Builds and look at them for possible ones to paste in. Additionally, players would be messaging us asking us to paste good builds in or to consider their plots for it. This is an additional load that we really do not need to be dealing with.

• Additionally, what would this do to the building side of the server? What is to say that commoners will continue to help move the various active projects on the server forwards when they can just make a really nice Theme Build and have it pasted in. We (Project Leaders) do rely on commoners as a workforce to build projects. More so, what is to say that this idea won't be expanded towards Freebuild as well. There have been various comments about pasting various commoner projects and solo builds on Freebuild onto the Mainmap. This change would legitimise those comments to use Freebuild builds as well as placeholders, expanding it into a massive workload.

While the Idea of using good and complete theme builds as placeholders might seem like a good one to help drive engagement, there are several hidden issues that could affect the server. If people want to help progress or engage with building on the server, there are loads of active projects to build on and one can go to any of the Designers, Project Leaders or even Bart for stuff to do.

 

[MykelUmm]

Just to add to the discussion

The first two issues that draonic has noted I think can easily be dealt with by being sensitive about how we paste them in. Maybe imagine them as a gallery of concepts that reward particularly good builds, and give a bit more engagement to those exploring unfinished areas of the map. Maybe maintaining the border of the theme build and having a sign to note, who built it, and that it is a theme build and that this area is a WIP. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good after all.

Also the last concern I would question. The slope aint slippery if you don't let it be, you know, It doesn't even have to be a slope. From the start you can just say that FB build will never be placed on the main map, this is a new feature that we are adding to theme builds to boost community engagement, and that's the start and the end of it.

But yes I do agree that if the designers don't want to increase their workload, they shouldn't. However, designers shouldn't be afraid to delegate tasks to forman, artist, guides, or even trusted commoners, especially if they think something is a good idea but don't have the time to do it themselves.

Not saying I have the answers just adding some nuance

 

[TheStephen]

Cheers for the response Drao, I'd anticipated anticipated several of those you brought up, so I do have some suggestions on making it work for some locations perhaps. I do realise this idea won't work for everything/everywhere. Nor should the themebuild for every week be used, that's definitely not what I'm advocating. Just some targeted builds. Essay incoming... Summary at the bottom.

Issue one: empty/bad terrain. I completely get this as basically you don't want overloading with more terrain work when there's already plenty to do on mainworld. A pasted in build may look odd being on unfinished terrain, but probably no more odd than some of the terrain in the Shire, along the Great River between Lothlorien and Amon Hen, or indeed the placeholder/prototype Minas Morgul. People continually ask why we don't have builds, it doesn't really make a difference whether they ask that, or about random builds, they're still going to ask regardless.

Solution: I'd still rather have bad Elostirion than nothing, as by the guidance you've set out, it should probably be yeeted given 2 of the 3 towers have been floating there for the last 2 years at least. A guide book entry for each location would solve this issue. E.g. "Beorn's House: PLACEHOLDER. This build, made by X is a placeholder until this project area becomes active and will be replaced... general description".

Issue two: inconsistency in scale & style: clearly not all themebuild topics will be appropriate, so I'm not saying use all of them. Some themebuilds should be for fun, others could have a purpose such as mainworld inclusion. There currently is no style for Rhovanion on mainworld, so there cannot be any clashes with anything there as there are no buildings to clash with. Same for Lindon. So something like Rhosgobel would be achievable as it's small, and isolated, and there is no set style. Gondor and Rohan have styles to follow already, so diverging too far from the recommended style clearly means it's not appropriate for inclusion.

Solution: Occasional targeted themebuild topic for potential inclusion on mainworld. If style exists (Gondor/Rohan etc): add example picture on themebuild forum post. As I've put for issue one: when you get to starting the region (if inactive) the placeholder build is removed and replaced with new style agreed for the whole region. Basically no different to how you revamp things now.

Issue three: workload and standard. Totally get that people are busy already so managing how this would work is important. You could however, use this to your advantage (see solution below). Presumably themebuilds are looked at anyway, as I understand artist applicants have to do one complete themebuild? Will this encourage people to actually apply for artist properly and actually grow your build team? Maybe, maybe not.
As for standards, these already vary significantly on mainworld: compare the Shire and newer areas of Gondor for example. There's a lot of difference. There aren't enough builders to keep everything up to date, particularly doing things region by region, so inconsistencies are always going to exist across the server no matter what the desired standard is.

Solutions: One targeted topic every 1 or 2 months (at most) for an isolated themebuild OR themebuild in an project active area. Run it for 2 weeks rather than 1, which allows people more time to build to a better standard, and then designers use the time that would've been spent on preparing terrain for the next themebuild to look over people's builds.
Build team choose the options voted on for themebuilds; therefore you already have the control needed to make this work. So once every month/two months you could choose 3 desired small builds for each of the active project areas using the terrain you've already prepared in the region. Voted for option gets the terrain pasted onto themebuild plot, and then winning build is pasted back into mainworld in the same way mainworld plots work (with edits applied). From what I can see, this would cut your work down, not increase it, as you're essentially getting builds to add to active project areas. As for messaging - identify in the post: only first themebuild of each month is up for inclusion.

Issue four: Solo/group projects have already been pasted onto the mainmap (Mairon Temple POTD), I wouldn't say that's led to a slippery slope. You could used targeted themebuilds as a means to control this. You might find that more people actually do targeted themebuilds than would ordinarily offer to help on mainworld plots. Similarly, you may attract people who normally only do freebuild stuff to actually contribute to mainworld building. I don't think you're going to lose the people who do mainworld plots.

Solution: running this once every 1 or 2 months isn't going to lose you your workforce in mainworld. Rather, it's probably going to gain you some nice builds from people who may not ordinarily contribute. Or at the very least, build ideas.

Summary:
Having something is usually better than nothing
Every 1 or 2 months
Controlled, targeted themebuild topic for isolated locations or identified active project areas requiring small/medium-ish builds
Clearly identify that only the selected topic each month/two months is up for inclusion in mainworld
Style guidance in the form of an image on the forum post for the themebuild (if in active project area/area with existent style)
Guide book entry when pasted into mainworld (if in non active area) identifying as a placeholder

 

[Green_Giant]

I would like to just add some extra positives to Stephens idea that haven't been mentioned.

Adding, even only a handful of small locations to the map, would also create more material to be used by other teams of the server. The guide team can show off and provide lore/server lore of some new locations during tours, and the media team can even use it in some way also, weather it is screenshots or video material.

 

[junoknight]

Some additional benefits I can think of:
- Theme choices. Maybe once a month there is a theme that specifically aims to put something on the map. We find an empty hill, outdated build, whatever, and decide to feature a theme build winner in that spot for one month (or however long until it is replaced or another build is featured). Then, knowing this is the expectation, builders can work with theme participants on style and substance stuff that would matter. Could increase engagement in general.
- Artist training. People with artist apps open could have something much more specific and guided to build for a theme as part of their app, and have the chance to have that app build featured on the map as well.
- General engagement. Theme builds have a core group of people who build most of the time, features bursts of activity from artist applicants, and is littered with empty plots from adventurers (or people like me who always intend to get to it but never do). Knowing a theme build could end up the map makes it feel less like an arbitrary project and gives it meaning, could encourage that engagement.

On the topic of quality and fit - I don't disagree at all. I see this as an opportunity to extend something like artist school out, providing the foreman/designer teams especially with extra incentive to guide the theme participants in the right direction.

 

[Mershy]

The main argument I can see happening is that if X build or theme was announced and had the chance to be placed on the main map, the build team would immediately jump on this and create their own ideas arguably being "unfair" for others. Don't get me wrong, it's an interesting idea but I cannot see the benefits since we have active projects that are always in need of help.

Also, an important aspect of this is also the quality in which these builds would be. For X theme I would expect proper planning, lore research and concepts before you even start building, ultimately being a small project in its self. That is that standard I would expect because that is the standard we are given to create and build projects on the main map.

 

[aVeryAngryBadger]

Hello! Here’s my thoughts.

Thanks, Stephen, for raising this idea. It’s good to have a discussion about it and hear people’s thoughts on the matter.

My perspective on this issue is: how can we make the map the best it can be? Which is pretty much my job as a designer. And that does include taking the community into considersation as part of that, as they are so integral to the process.

While I agree with Mershy and Drao's points above, my main reason for not supporting this proposition is about the concept of placeholders, and whether they have a ‘place’ on the map.

I personally don’t like having placeholders on the map and I disagree with the idea that having something is better than nothing. While placeholders contribute to ‘filling space’ I think that builds of lower quality with less planning do not properly represent us as a server and usually bring up more questions that those of ‘where is this and why isn’t it built yet’. I know we do currently have placeholders on the map, and while I am not petitioning for them to be removed, I don’t want to add any more.

At the end of the day this map is not going to be finished for a long time and there’s going to be areas that people want to explore but cannot do so yet. I do not believe adding temporary builds is the answer to this. I think placeholders can ruin immersion more than an empty area can, especially if we have to stress that this is a placeholder. There is already so much to explore on the map, and if people do ‘run out’ of things to do, a few placeholders every couple of months will not solve this problem.

I also think that placeholders can linger longer than intended, and those areas with placeholders can often be neglected, because ‘there’s something there’.

In regards to my comments above that these projects will be of ‘lower quality’, this is by no way meant to insult anyone, and I hope people can understand my perspective even if they disagree: I know there are currently, and will be, talented builders who have not yet joined the build team, but even with these skills, projects that have not had the time, thought, planning and team involvement in the development of them are simply just not up to the standard that we are striving for on this map. We’re not just after good looking builds, so much more goes into it, and it’s that amount of work that makes the map the standard it is today.

On the point Stephen made that some areas of the map, eg. Shire, are already low quality, what’s the harm in having more areas of low quality… um do I need to answer that one?! I know there is a stark difference between earlier projects and more recent ones, but they are still completed projects that were planned and built with consideration.

The suggestions made on how to ensure these placeholders are up to standard raise them to the level of mini projects, which use up the resources and time of builders that could be spent on the main map. It’s not that we are trying to avoid work or effort, it’s that we only have so much time and energy, and we want to spend that on main map projects. The suggestions on how to cut down this amount of work actually shave off very little and it’s still a great deal of work and responsibility.

I don’t think there is anything wasted about a completed theme build, especially for artist applicants, and it certainly isn’t a waste of time to complete it if it doesn’t end up on the map. At the end of themebuild each builder is more skilled then when they started, has learnt loads about how to use the rp, our custom inventory, concept planning, etc. etc., and that’s hugely valuable. Themebuilds are also usually done at the beginning of the app to show they can build to a brief or to given them ideas and a structure if they don’t know what to build in those early days. They are rarely initially up to map build standard. By the time most applicants are getting towards that standard, they are already building on the map, often doing large sections of a project by themselves.

As for the argument that this opportunity will attract builders, I think it will actually discourage people from joining the build team if they have an opportunity to put their own solo build on the map without an application. I don’t want to turn this into another debate about artist apps, but they take time not just because these applicants are learning how to build up to standard, but also because they are learning how to work with the team and through that process become more involved in the community. I’m not really interested in attracting people who thrive off competition. I’m sure there are exceptions, but once people have reached a quick goal that involved little investment, they usually wander off looking for the next challenge.

I don’t want to appear mean and deny people their opportunity to be ‘featured’ on the map, I just want the server and map to be the best it can. We currently have loads of opportunities for server members to get involved, my last project wouldn’t even be half finished at this point without the contribution of the community. It’s great being in tours or wandering around the map with commoners and adventures when they point out something and say - I built that! That’s never going to change and is a very important part of the server.

Badger x

 

[HoverKing]

I also think that placeholders can linger longer than intended, and those areas with placeholders can often be neglected, because ‘there’s something there’.

That right there basically sums up my thoughts on the matter.

Solo/group projects have already been pasted onto the mainmap (Mairon Temple POTD)

Personally I do not recall any other examples (which is most likely due to my own ignorance rather than anything else); as for the Mairon Temple, I would say it is really not representative of the discussion at hand. This was a small project aimed to correct a lore-inaccuracy in a place that (to my understanding) is not in any risk of major revamp, and the addition was something that is not readily seen, unless you know where to look and how. I doubt there are/were/will be too many other instances of this sort.