DocKangey
Provider
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Posts
- 167
- Society
- FoFW
- Avatar Name
- Candor Kangey Pirx
I couldn't help but have a good laugh when I read Pinky's last part of the "Life of a Newbie" series and came across Marco's comment on the bad mentor experience. (Life of a Newbie) Sure, everything is on MA's priority list. Always has been, always will be
But it made me think about all the great ideas that have been posted here about making the mentoring system more encouraging and rewarding for mentors. And to think about reasons why none of those ideas have ever been implemented.
I have refered to it before, but I think Alice just summed the whole thing up in one nice sentence: Mentoring helps MA to get new players to deposit more money. If I look at it from a business perspective it absolutely does make sense to allow disciple farmers, new players will either quit quickly (they most likely would have quit anyway) or deposit early to get out of the mentor's grasp. Either way it works for MA, and there are always unofficial mentors to do the real work for free.
Of course the overall value of mentor gifts dropped has to be minimized not to hurt the in game economy. Especially with disciple farmers around you can't be dropping a lot of value all the time. And of course ME items come with TT=0 because MA just guarantees for the TT value of an item. It does make sense.
This will be the reason why we will never see an implementation of mentors getting anything of the skillgains of their disciples. If mentors would get a percentage of skills after graduation it would be as easy to abuse as the current system, if a mentor gets skillgain earlier it would be even easier to abuse. And it would be an additional value factor for an avatar, a value MA hs to compensate. I doubt that (or any similar idea for that matter) will ever get implemented.
It seems to me the only way to get more fairness into distribution of gifts and/or benefits would be to manually review mentors and have real persons decide who should get what. Any automatic system can be fooled as soon as users find out how it works, but to implement a "fair" reward system it's mechanics have to be transparent, eg. people would have to know why Alice gets a better mentor gift than me Once you know how it works, you can abuse it. Reviews and distribution of gifts by real persons will never be implemented by MA either, it's too expensive.
Which, IMHO, leaves just one alternative to try to get the whole mentoring concept into a working system. Only if a (large) group of mentors is willing to take matters into their own hands and use publicity (in game and for example EF) as well as self policing concepts, peer reviews, ratings and os on to maintain a high standard mentor group. That way it would be possible for new players to rely on a group/community instead of just one single person telling them what/who a good mentor would be.
My question: how many mentors would be interested in putting in the extra effort to start and maintain such a group community? There is no extra gift to gain, you wouldn't get paid for it. You'd need to invest extra time. And you probably would get some additional headache out of it as well. Who would sign up for such madness?
But it made me think about all the great ideas that have been posted here about making the mentoring system more encouraging and rewarding for mentors. And to think about reasons why none of those ideas have ever been implemented.
I have refered to it before, but I think Alice just summed the whole thing up in one nice sentence: Mentoring helps MA to get new players to deposit more money. If I look at it from a business perspective it absolutely does make sense to allow disciple farmers, new players will either quit quickly (they most likely would have quit anyway) or deposit early to get out of the mentor's grasp. Either way it works for MA, and there are always unofficial mentors to do the real work for free.
Of course the overall value of mentor gifts dropped has to be minimized not to hurt the in game economy. Especially with disciple farmers around you can't be dropping a lot of value all the time. And of course ME items come with TT=0 because MA just guarantees for the TT value of an item. It does make sense.
This will be the reason why we will never see an implementation of mentors getting anything of the skillgains of their disciples. If mentors would get a percentage of skills after graduation it would be as easy to abuse as the current system, if a mentor gets skillgain earlier it would be even easier to abuse. And it would be an additional value factor for an avatar, a value MA hs to compensate. I doubt that (or any similar idea for that matter) will ever get implemented.
It seems to me the only way to get more fairness into distribution of gifts and/or benefits would be to manually review mentors and have real persons decide who should get what. Any automatic system can be fooled as soon as users find out how it works, but to implement a "fair" reward system it's mechanics have to be transparent, eg. people would have to know why Alice gets a better mentor gift than me Once you know how it works, you can abuse it. Reviews and distribution of gifts by real persons will never be implemented by MA either, it's too expensive.
Which, IMHO, leaves just one alternative to try to get the whole mentoring concept into a working system. Only if a (large) group of mentors is willing to take matters into their own hands and use publicity (in game and for example EF) as well as self policing concepts, peer reviews, ratings and os on to maintain a high standard mentor group. That way it would be possible for new players to rely on a group/community instead of just one single person telling them what/who a good mentor would be.
My question: how many mentors would be interested in putting in the extra effort to start and maintain such a group community? There is no extra gift to gain, you wouldn't get paid for it. You'd need to invest extra time. And you probably would get some additional headache out of it as well. Who would sign up for such madness?
Last edited: