Cantr II Discussion Forum

Don't be distracted by the title, this isn't meant to be a slam, merely something I've been thinking about a long time and some of my opinions and observations. (And okay, a bit of an attention-getting device...)

First off, let me clarify that I don't think Cantr is a failure as a game. It's unlike anything else out there, it's incredibly addictive, and it seems very good at both hooking new players and making it next to impossible for old players to leave, no matter how much we may complain about some of the changes.

This thread is not about Cantr as a game, but Cantr as a society simulator.

To be perfectly frank, it's my opinion that many of the societies in Cantr are a sham. Not only that, but unrealistic, unbalanced shams that would never have even have come into existence in the current state of things. All these old empires, all the "glory days" you hear so much about in the forum would have been completely different if those characters had been playing the same game we're in now.

I'm a fan of many of the recent changes that give us more realism. (Though speaking of realism, item rot and repairs still need a lot of balancing, and natural healing needs to come back, but that's another thread entirely...) Yes, they make life for our chars harder, but IMHO the struggle only makes the game more interesting. Cantr just isn't as fun when it consists of a bunch of potato farmers living in a utopia, and most of the conflict and politics happen not out of necessity, but because a few players felt like importing some OOC concepts to spice things up.

As all my chars up to this point have died of boredom (except for the one that was murdered by those filthy sheep), I actually look forward to the day starvation might be a threat. I like challenge.

However, what I don't like is the way just about every change creates a huge imbalance, giving an advantage to one group while making things harder for another. (Usually it's the old characters that get the boost while newspawns get screwed, except for the skill change which seemed to have a completely opposite effect...)

I know many of these changes were made with the intention of creating long-term benefits at the expense of temporary inconveniences, but the disruptions caused by those benefits might do more harm than good. Sure, individual characters can adapt and even thrive, but the 'simulator' part becomes a joke. We're supposed to be developing societies here, but you can't build anything meaningful on a rotten foundation.

Supposedly the Polish players are having a hard time of it. So are lots of the foreign language areas and new lands. Yet the general attitude from long time players seems to be "Suck it up. Get organized. Survival of the fittest." etc. etc.

And to an extent I agree with that, but it just seems incredibly hypocritical when you consider the fact that none of the existing societies were ever asked to do that in their formative stages.

I wonder, how many harvesting machines would there be now if the characters who built them hadn't been able to just yank the iron right out of the ground? How many vehicles? Sabers? Iron shields? Even when you consider the ones that are newly built, a lot of what made them possible were the tools and infrastructure developed under the old rules. (I'm mainly using iron for an example because it was one of the most drastic changes, and Cantr's economy revolves around it, though the more recent stuff has had plenty of effect too...how many crossbows have been built since they started requiring so many tools and parts?)

I know Cantr is never going to stop changing, and I have no problem with new machines, tools, and other minor tweaks that actually make sense in an IC context. What I get sick of, and what is constantly defeating the whole purpose of Cantr (letting societies develop naturally with a minimum of OOC influence), are these well-intentioned, but ultimately disastrous upheavals of the universe that seem to come along every couple of months.

Once programming get through with the planned interface changes with the town and building names, and vehicles and machines and buildings or whatever start decaying too, is that it? I don't mean 'is the game going to be frozen in amber from that point on', but is that going to be about the end of the huge disruptions? Eventually programming has got to get the basic framework of the game set up the way they like it.

Of course that still won't do anything about all those existing artifacts (both physical and social) from the old Cantr, but at least from that point on the issue won't be compounded any further...

In a lot of ways Cantr reminds me of a game in the beta-testing phase, with the key difference being that those kinds of games eventually finish beta-testing and have a player wipe in order to start everyone off on an even footing.

Now even though I personally wouldn't mind, I'm NOT suggesting a player wipe, mainly because I know it would never happen and in the meantime all my other points would be drowned out by a cacophony of angry howls. This thread is all just observations, remember? (Though to be honest there are times when I think I would pay to play a version of this game where everyone gets a fresh start in a world with consistent natural laws...be interesting to see what kind of societies develop then.)

I do agree that a lot of Cantr is not about society, but to be honest, society and politics in cantr is damned boring reading for the bystander, for it to be a really interesting political game, everonye would have to put in an insight, and to be honest i cant be bothered to read all of it!

And by the way, Sheep are sacred!

It's hard to take a player whose character was murdered by sheep, seriously.

Not that I don't tend to agree with your valid points. It's just peculiar. Cantr is in beta testing all the time, it is a project in development, no doubt about it. But sheep, seriously? In hind sight, it's easy to say this and that and stop World War I and say what should've happened. I mean, what happened, you got smothered in its wool? Though the analysis, and looking back at the game, makes it interesting. Especially when the biggest problem in the game is with rogue sheep.

I wouldn't say there are no societies in Cantr. They're there. Some are imported OOC ideas, more often than not, very influenced by the real world. Not all are driven by necessity, though I see the higher tier of staff trying to do that. I don't think it's bad. It's just not ideal.

Once again, this is a game, the object is to make a fun society simulator, not a copy of real life. Who would play? Come on now.

Having had a really nice char getting killed by a cow, I can't really join Nitefyre in his comments ... And I knew of a whole town scared in a building because of two goats quietly eating some grass outside; and of a town that was utterly destroyed by mere raccoons ... So I won't say anything about the sheep ...

It's an interesting point, Lumin. Just a few quick replies:

Lumin wrote:it's incredibly addictive, and it seems very good at both hooking new players

I tend to disagree ... I think we loose oozes of potentially good players who are just too much frightened off in their first one or two days. I think our site is unappealing to strangers and our Cantr world too harsh for newspawns.

Once players are in for, say, a day or two, it's a different story, though ...

Lumin wrote:All these old empires, all the "glory days" you hear so much about in the forum would have been completely different if those characters had been playing the same game we're in now.

I fear that that is totally true ....

Lumin wrote:Cantr just isn't as fun when it consists of a bunch of potato farmers living in a utopia, and most of the conflict and politics happen not out of necessity, but because a few players felt like importing some OOC concepts to spice things up.

I couldn't agree more! Admitted, Quillanoi's society is to a serious extent me doing politics using OOC concepts to spice things up (except its pacifism, which was due to serious disgust by my char), but still I agree.

Lumin wrote:Sure, individual characters can adapt and even thrive, but the 'simulator' part becomes a joke. We're supposed to be developing societies here, but you can't build anything meaningful on a rotten foundation.

I'm not sure what *exactly* your point is. Is the Cantr foundation 'rotten' because it changes too often? Or rotten so that it needs change? Or rotten because we changed too much?

Lumin wrote:Supposedly the Polish players are having a hard time of it. So are lots of the foreign language areas and new lands.

Yes, and no. Yes, they have a hard time, because it's probably more difficult now than it used to be to build up a new society. I can notice it quite clearly with my char trying to set up a new company - it's rather harsh. But it should not be overstated, I think. The Polish are only playing, what, four months? Five? At most. The English are playing for four years. The Polish already are sailing, exploring new islands, have graphical maps, have kingdoms way larger than just a location, etc. The Polish are disadvantages, but doing quite well. Developing a new area just takes a lot of time. You can either make it much easier, they will grow fast but there will be no challenge and it will get boring once their society is up and running, or you can make it hard, and get a slower development. I think the latter is eventually better.

Lumin wrote:I wonder, how many harvesting machines would there be now if the characters who built them hadn't been able to just yank the iron right out of the ground? How many vehicles? Sabers? Iron shields?

Yes, I do think that where most recent changes have made development only harder, we should have some that make it easier to counterbalance. I do see your point and I do agree. I think we need land scarcity and stuff like that to create struggle and competition, to create challenges, and to create politics for a reason rather than just players trying to implement OOC structures. But I don't want Cantr to get stuck and regret the slowness of the production of cars, for example. So yes, we need to find ways to counterbalance a bit.

Lumin wrote:Once programming get through with the planned interface changes with the town and building names, and vehicles and machines and buildings or whatever start decaying too, is that it?

No, it won't be

What about the ability to destroy things rather than only construct? What about using cannons to shoot at ships from the coast? What about rivers? What about free roaming? What about fishing from boats?

For as far as I'm concerned, these are all 'in the pipeline' ... And yes, several of them are disruptive.

I am wondering what the alternatives are. Stopping development is one, of course. I think it would be fine for a while, and then Cantr will die a slow death ... I don't think it will make us keep up with other games, I think staff will loose its interest (I will), and I think there is too much missing in Cantr to do that. Or perhaps developing an entirely new version to replace this one, rather than upsetting this one every time. That is an option I often seriously contemplate. I just can never make up my mind ...

Lumin wrote:Eventually programming has got to get the basic framework of the game set up the way they like it.

Hmm, yes, perhaps, but Cantr is miles and miles away from the way I like it ... Even though I like Cantr ...

Lumin wrote:In a lot of ways Cantr reminds me of a game in the beta-testing phase, with the key difference being that those kinds of games eventually finish beta-testing and have a player wipe in order to start everyone off on an even footing.

I can see how Cantr is sometimes too much in beta testing, especially after four years. I do think, though, that the very nature of MMORPGs allows for more beta-state style. Big games like Entropia also continuously develop. I think it is the only way to keep up with things. Famous, 'static' games of the past have gradually disappeared - by not changing you don't keep going, I think.

Lumin wrote:(Though to be honest there are times when I think I would pay to play a version of this game ...

That's interesting to know ...

Jos Elkink wrote:Having had a really nice char getting killed by a cow, I can't really join Nitefyre in his comments ... And I knew of a whole town scared in a building because of two goats quietly eating some grass outside; and of a town that was utterly destroyed by mere raccoons ... So I won't say anything about the sheep ...

The stylistic choice to respond like that was for a satirical effect, of how animals (like sheep) seem to be the deciding factors of how societies thrive. Understandably, at one point in human history, we were struggling to survive against said beasts, and not only their attacks, but their rabbies and other diseases. (Woops, did I just slip a suggestion for an animal-borne disease ). However, I think whilst still having that share of societies in the uninhabited islands, for instance, Burgeo/Aki, makes fine sense for that survival society, I certainly think (as I slipped in) that feuds should begin within and amongst the existing, established "societies" due IC things to develop such as things like scarcity, not <i>sheep</i>.

I don't think we should be quick to criticize Cantr as a society simulator, as we're operating on an accelerated clock. We're still in the first Cantr character lifetime, and we've already seen wars, piracy, thievery, governments, etc, through out, for whatever reasons.

I guess this should be a theme I should touch on in the article I'm thinking about writing.

As a representative of the dinosaurs, I'd like to touch on the subject. I have about 5 characters in their 70's, one in his 50's, one in his 30's, and one in his 20's again. Both my 70 year old's run powerful towns, not because it was easy back then, but because I am active and did not quit... or maybe I didn't quit because I was successful.

Well, Someone posted something like this a while back and claimed us old key holders couldn't handle today's new spawn world... so I created a new spawn who ended up in Lad. He worked his way up to General.

A year later, I created another character, this new spawn lives in Quillanoi and has made a Stone Quarry, Has two homes, smelters, all sorts of machines, and is a member of the council.

I just created another character two weeks ago who spawned on a deserted island. It seems two explorers were gathering food and I appeared. I went my separate way and each new region has no buildings or notes or anything. The animals aren't attacking me, but with my fists, I can't even get small bones for a knife. I have yet to find wood or a good spot to stop. But I promise you, he will succeed.

People are too impatient and want power NOW, any of you can have power and wealth if you work for it.

Find the most active 50 players (or however many you think we have that are active) and place characters of theirs on an island the size of Sring-Sri and see what happens.

Sring-Sri has only 5 regions.

Too me, it's just a game. It can't really fail or not fail. It, like any other game, can be amusing or not. Doesn't really fail.

And like any other game, it can become too stupid to be enjoyable if one overly complicates it and tinkers with it too much.

Bowser wrote:Find the most active 50 players (or however many you think we have that are active) and place characters of theirs on an island the size of Sring-Sri and see what happens.

Sring-Sri has only 5 regions.

Although I have to say I agree with what you're getting at, I, personally, would not include a character there. It would be too damn noisy

And it really doesn't take that long at all to form the foundation of a 'successful' character. The argument of what is a 'successful' character is up to interpretation, though.

Nonewithstanding, as I think about the topic at hand more now, I realize Cantr is far from a failed society simulator. I interpret society to be categorized into social, political, economic and cultural. Technological and geographical impact these main four, but those are the easiest to divide a humanities study. I'm going to look at the MidNorth Union, aka Krif Drojf Seatown, merely because it is the example I'm most knowledgeable about. This is not a topic in discussion of the Region, but Cantr as a society simulator.

So is there...

Social? Yes, there's communication, organizations (clans, families: nuclear as well as Nosse-like), businesses, government employment, etc.

Political? Indubitably. There's not only local governments for towns and villages, but an overarching Regional Union, though I'd prefer to call it a confederacy of sorts. It is not limited to simple 'running of the town', but diplomacy as well as conspiracy, to acquire the more precious of resources.

Economics? Mhmm, the layout of the resources in the isthmus is polar. Limestone is to one end, and staff unfairly put coal and iron/hematite on the other, together, as well as with the wood. It creates two major strategic positions, to sit on, in terms of resources. Of course, if you're not sitting on it, you're going to have to broker deals to be able to do what economics is about -how to get raw resources into goods and services-. There's certainly business/corporations in the area that seek to do this.

Cultural? See avatar.

*Now, there are clear out of characters ideas and influences, by certain players. But once it's in the game, and played with it, there's no extracting. Anyways, the example we're all familiar with has sprouted to its own society and group in its own fashion, though the name and titles are similar to the allusion. Sure, some of these ideas are more OOC than others, but they're there now.

Keep in mind that Cantr is a Society Simulator,

-so*ci*e*ty n, pl -ties 1 : COMPANIONSHIP 2 : a voluntary association of persons for common ends 3 : a part of a community bound together by common interests and standards; esp : the group or set of fashionable people

-sim*u*late vb -lat*ed, -lat*ing : to give or create the effect or appearance of : IMITATE; also : to make a simulation of -- sim*u*la*tor n

not necessarily a Society Developer. You could develop socities for Cantr usage, of course, but that's not the necessary interpretation. Not everything has to be brand new and novel. If things work, why not borrow? And I can't say I see a single government or society based solely on one single model, each have their subtle but important differences.

One may bring up that four law model, but I don't know about that in my personal experience. I don't run a single town with only those four laws. I try to be a little more creative

I also know this because I'm constantly updating paperwork for Cantr, whether is the Hobbes Encyclopedia [Reference], the Ranger's Tale [Memoir], Echoes of a Life Lived [Poem Anthology], the Ranger's Revised Charter [Operational Charter], the LORD Initiative [Radios], the Guidelines of Kirinn Forest*...are all things I've spent time editing the last 2 weeks.

*Collect your Cardset today! Each has its unique Resident bio and message!

Bowser wrote:A year later, I created another character, this new spawn lives in Quillanoi and has made a Stone Quarry, Has two homes, smelters, all sorts of machines, and is a member of the council.

I know who you are.

Quillanoi has always been the only town you can takeover without a weapon or key.

Jos Elkink wrote:

Lumin wrote:Supposedly the Polish players are having a hard time of it. So are lots of the foreign language areas and new lands.

Yes, and no. Yes, they have a hard time, because it's probably more difficult now than it used to be to build up a new society. I can notice it quite clearly with my char trying to set up a new company - it's rather harsh. But it should not be overstated, I think. The Polish are only playing, what, four months? Five? At most. The English are playing for four years. The Polish already are sailing, exploring new islands, have graphical maps, have kingdoms way larger than just a location, etc. The Polish are disadvantages, but doing quite well. Developing a new area just takes a lot of time. You can either make it much easier, they will grow fast but there will be no challenge and it will get boring once their society is up and running, or you can make it hard, and get a slower development. I think the latter is eventually better.

Hard times passed I think. We don't have problems with bodies and not reproducting animals. Now we enter the path to fast development and in some regions growth is really fast I agree with Jos, that challenge is best solution for not being bored. I can't wait to discover english zone

I wonder, how many harvesting machines would there be now if the characters who built them hadn't been able to just yank the iron right out of the ground? How many vehicles? Sabers? Iron shields? Even when you consider the ones that are newly built, a lot of what made them possible were the tools and infrastructure developed under the old rules. (I'm mainly using iron for an example because it was one of the most drastic changes, and Cantr's economy revolves around it, though the more recent stuff has had plenty of effect too...how many crossbows have been built since they started requiring so many tools and parts?)

I dont dont know about the enlish terriotry, but on the dutch island, i think things are finally getting somewhere, vehicles and machines are being build with 'new' iron and steel and also weapons are made and roads starting to improve. It doesnt happen very fast, but it does happen...

The island simple wasnt developed enough to have much use of old machines and things build before those change.

So maybe you should play in a different language to see how things are developing on a less developed island.

I was thinking that this game would be a lot better if there was emphasis on other materials other than Iron ore, or rather hematite. But since that seems to be the primary focus of the game (trading to get materials to make steel), at least in the english areas, I can agree that as a society simulator, this game fails. The societies that do exist are fragile, but they are maintained by those who possess iron weapons over those who have bone or wood weapons, and who are thus powerless to change things. And try setting up your own society, where some maniac can just come through one day, declare that this territory is now the territory of the dead and kill you on the spot. What's a bone spear going to do against a diamond encrusted steel claymore? Nothing.

The problem is that social darwinism is not really a good foundation for society, and, I agree that this is precisely what the older, more powerful players advocate. But only because they are at the top of the food chain. For those of us on the bottom, how can we say we participate in society when all we do is farm and are denied the opportunity to take an active role in government because all but the lowest functionary positions are monopolized by those carrying the steel weapons? That's a bunch of crap, and means even those who want to take an active role as a CITIZEN in a town do not have access to the government. Our other alternative, taking over the government, is also not open to us, because, once again, we do not get access to the steel monopoly that others have established and maintain simply by virtue of when they joined the game.

As a result, newer players that were not lucky enough to hear about this game years ago, maintain a stable of 15 characters who all do the same thing: farm or extract resources. And all for the same types of people: thirty and fourty year olds who offer some sort of patronage as payment for my services. In other words, regardless of what artificial government system is grafted over the top of it, the ONLY society that really exists in Cantr is the feudal society, built on patron-client relationships, rather than citizen-society ones, and those opportunities are not even open to us even if we did want to follow that route.

Perhaps a couple changes in the system (such as times and materials it takes to make steel, which, to be honest, at this level of technology, the hunting and gathering state, should not even be available, or huge reduction of the time it takes to travel between cities on foot, making a system of communication effectively possible) would change that arrangement, but as it stands today, Cantr is based on ONE type of society and because of this inherent flaw, rise of other types of society is not even possible.

I don't have all that much time to respond to this post with, but I'll make the most of what I have.

I disagree with your sentiments absolutely and irreversibly. I've created characters after my main batch, who are in their fifties. So I have some in their thirties, forties, etc. My thirty something year old received a metal weapon by the time he was 25, an age which my first character began to lead a town. There are many oppurtunities to get these steel weapons you claim are difficult to get, and I know, because I've done it. What you're advocating has already been implemented, with many iron changes and hematite changes and smelting furnace changes of requirements, etc. And to argue against your steel vs. other weapons issue, there's skills and randomness and deterioration, to work against those already established.