Any update on L17 core / extended core changes?

by **Jediluke** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:44 am

"Obviously that's out of date, but "most games happen in one of these levels" could be perceived to suggest that it's a prescription."

Sirius, how else would you point that out?

by **Lee** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 3:34 pm

So I received a visit from the feds just before 3:00am this morning. Having busted my door down, they asked whether we could discuss core level selection. I wilfully obliged. A lengthy discussion ensued. For the longest time I felt like I was being subjected to their views rather than being engaged to discuss them. Opportunities to contribute were rather scarce, I barely felt like I was engaged in a live discussion and if anything, it was almost like listening to a pre-recorded podcast. Sadly, having had a significant lack of sleep, no time to prepare and having been asked to use my microphone (ridiculously self-conscious when using it) I was rather incoherent and made little sense when opportunities did arise (I feel that some of this also impacted upon my previous post as some points have been exaggerated and a few of them are wrong, see below). Twenty-five minutes later there was a short discussion with a greater share of turn-taking before we decided to part ways. For me, this wasn't the ideal way of going about it and at times I felt the discussion bordered upon being confrontational. However, I have no issue with these guys and I put this down to their passion for the game rather than being anything personal. In a sense it was nice to hear two people care so much about a game as old as Descent.

Naturally, this got me thinking about the core level selection thread on the forums. Having thought it over I'd like to revert back to my previous stance on core level selection that "core isn't going to please everyone but it serves a purpose". I feel like I missed the point in my last post but now, I'd like to take a different perspective on core level selection. Why would you want your level to be core? Why would you want someone else's level to be core? Why would you want to play core? Having thought about it I wouldn't want a single level I've made to make core. Ever. Firstly given the current situation with core level selection, not only would you have to convince maybe eight to ten people that its a good level, it would have to be so good as to encourage them to keep playing it over and over again with other people, in spite of so many other viable levels. Even if you were successful the next problem you'll find is that both you and your accomplices would almost certainly have had to grind said level into the dust just to become eligible for core level selection. Assuming you managed all of this would you genuinely want to play said level after all of this grinding? For me, I'd rather see lots of levels with less plays than a few levels with many. Diversity is king.

Core is comprised of just nine levels (Mid 2017). As far as I can tell for say D1, I'd say theres up to a thousand levels available to be played across the various active level repositories. Of those thousand I'd say theres hundreds of D1 1v1 levels. Some of these will vary in suitability, quality and appeal. In contrast to the core list, there is a plethora of D1 1v1 levels available for us to play (never mind D2 and D3 on top of that). Many of the active pilots on the ladder (myself included) have been doing this quietly in the background without fuss. Whilst the proposed DKH core level monopoly and Rie2mann debate (great level that I ask Leto to play, in my opinion) had me incensed, theres really no need to be. I think pushing a non-DKH level into core would be a tall order, if not also futile. If two players can decide upon what level to play then theres really no need for core. Why pander to core when you can just continue to play all the levels you actually want to play (assuming you don't want to play a core level, either is fine)? Flexibility trumps statistics. Compromise is key. Why change core when you can bypass it completely? In my opinion, core is largely insignificant and assuming people don't just want to play levels in the core list (again, this is fine too) then the issue isn't whats in the core list, its why aren't we able to compromise on level selection (yes this includes promotion challenges where you may agree upon playing non-core levels)? Heres some afterthoughts, see below. Thanks for your time...sad act

-Core is not here to be fun.
-Core is not here to be interesting.
-Core is not here to be innovative.
-Core is not here to showcase level diversity.
-Core is not here to utilise vertical space.
-Core is not here to explore six degrees of freedom.
-Core is not necessarily going to provide rooms large enough for dogfighting.
-Core is not necessarily going to cover all styles and tactics.
-Core is not necessarily going to provide levels that promote slow weapon usage as well as vulcan or spreadfire.
-Core is not solely to blame for vulcan and missile whoring skills/tactics.
-Core may provide the opportunity for people to utilise vulcan and missile whoring skills/tactics with great effectivity.
-Core is not cherry picked by admins/council.
-Core is ultimately decided by admins/council.
-Core may be comprised of levels designed by just a single author.
-Core may discourage modern level designers from making new levels.
-Core may discourage people from exploring/playing non-core levels.
-Core may exclude levels that are competitively viable.
-Core may not utilise over twenty years of competitively viable levels.
-Core is only necessary so far as two people failing to agree upon a level.
-Core can be decided by soulless grinding of levels between a large enough group of people.
-Core is where levels go to die.

by **Maestro** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:10 pm

I'll go on the record and say that I will not be holding anyone to core rolls for promotions or challenges, as long as there's some negotiation for the level (i.e. not just "Tetrafusion or random roll").

by **Sirius** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:33 pm

I don't know if I can give a good answer, Jediluke - I can take guesses but the more precise something is, the more verbose it tends to be. Though maybe you could start by rephrasing it "the most commonly played levels" (core might not be > 50% necessarily anyway) and putting additional emphasis on that it's a starting point and not a destination...

And that might not even matter, because maybe that's not where the misconception comes from. It might be more helpful to ask other players what core means to them and if they recall how their views developed.

Do we recall, for instance, what happened in Vainiac's case? Maybe just an organic thing, some pilots play core far more than anything else of their own volition -> notice that by the rules they aren't required to do any more -> we need to shake it up by force so they'll quit being so darned boring?
If so, that's not messaging at all, but maybe something on the website reinforced it too; I can only speculate. It's also a valid complaint, I just don't much like the solution because it requires a value prescription from admins that "this level is good, you should be playing it" which has a whiff of arrogance to it.
Ultimately, I feel the job of the DCL is to facilitate games that mean something, not to force people to be fun to play against. You can't make someone be fun anyway.

by **bahamut** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 5:01 pm

Fury is a good map. THE CORE

by **Leto_II** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 5:08 pm

Given some suggestions in this thread, I just changed some textures in Rie2mann today. Though I'll miss the mauve, I think the visibility is much improved (which is what's important).

Here is the dmdb link:

http://www.enspiar.com/dmdb/viewMission.php?id=1363

by **LotharBot** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 5:09 pm

To summarize:

if you are the sort of pilot who enjoys level variety, who comes to agreement about where to play, who is willing to play at a disadvantage in order to see your opponent at their best, or who is willing to trade home-for-home or style-for-style -- core is neither FOR nor ABOUT you. You do not need to be beholden to it. If you don't like the current core levels, don't play them. Play the wide and agreeable variety of levels you like.

if you are the sort of pilot who only wants to play with an advantage, only wants to play your own angle, and will rank-sit and match-dodge and use the forum or chat to build political clout until you can force people to play you in megaoctafusionwrathbluforteio NH x5 -- core is ABOUT and FOR you. It's the way the ladder forces you to give people an opportunity to face you in levels somewhere near the "ladder average" rather than "that one subgame you really like". If your comfort zone is so small that you can't agree with other pilots and you can't meet them in the statistical-community-average-level-neighborhood, you don't have to play on the DCL.

For those who might be saying "wait, that second thing isn't a problem" -- the only reason it's not a problem is because of core. It was a problem on IDL, UDL, Cases, clan ladders, OGL, and many more. It was frequently a source of forum/chat drama, competing claims of style superiority and lameness, and people-who-didn't-play trying to vote or socially manipulate others in favor of personalities they liked most. I much prefer drama about "Logic is stale" to drama about "that guy refuses to play me on a level playing field".

by **Drakona** » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:41 pm

Awwwww. Group hug.