• Dear forum reader,

    To actively participate on the forum by joining discussions or starting your own threads or topics, you need a game account and to REGISTER HERE!

[Fellowships] Filters and other controls for fellowship applications

Are


  • Total voters
    12
  • Poll closed .

UlyssesBlue

Well-Known Member
Summary
I would like to propose some additional settings and controls be added to fellowships, that only mages/archmages can access and change, which act to automatically filter out unsuitable applicants and enable a bit more control over which people can apply or join the fellowship.

Description
In the fellowship settings the mages would be able to enable/disable a series of filters to define the minimum joining criteria. If none are chosen, we just have the existing system, where anyone can apply to a fellowship (or join immediately, if 'Join Directly' is enabled). If some filters are enabled, then set to desired levels, then only players who met those requirements would be able to try to join the fellowship. For all other players the Apply/Join button on the fellowship page would be missing or greyed out.

Some possible filters include:
- min/max applicant score
- min/max applicant chapter
- has a trader
- others? please suggest things


This also has the potential to speed up the application process and make it instantaneous for some fellowships, which may be of particular benefit to new or small fellowships. For example, say a fellowship only wants players in chapter 3 and above, but aside from that will happily take literally anyone who applies.
Under the current system this info is noted in the fellowship description, the fellowship settings are set to 'Applications Only', and mages have to remember to check the applications every now and then, review every applicant to see if they're suitable, accept the suitable ones, and delete the unsuitable ones. There would also be a bit of a delay for applicants, while they waited for their application to be accepted.
Under the proposed system, the fellowship settings could be set up to have a filter with Minimum Applicant Chapter = 3+, and 'Join Directly' enabled. Mages would no longer have to review cities, or check to see if applications have arrived. Players who meet the criteria would just join instantly, and those who don't meet it wouldn't be able to, and so would keep looking for a fellowship elsewhere.

Note that not all possible joining criteria will be able to be covered by filters. In this case the filters that do exist would still be useful to filter out some unsuitable applicants, and fellowships would just be set to 'Applications Only' so they could still review players before joining.

If we have joining criteria hard coded like this, we could perhaps expand on this by making it searchable? There could be a fellowship search which would allow people to find fellowships with a certain number of free places, and which had their joining criteria filters set to certain levels, or perhaps more generally just anything the player doing the searching was eligible to join. Maybe also make other fellowship criteria searchable as part of this feature, such as fellowship score, ranking, spire medals, tournament score, numbers of players, etc.

Motivation
This is intended to automate the application process a bit more, and provide benefits such as:
- preventing fellowships getting too many unsuitable applicants that they just have to waste time removing
- preventing inexperienced players wasting time applying for and waiting to hear back about applications that will never be accepted anyway
- help all players find suitable fellowships a bit more easily
- create an optional means for suitable applicants to join immediately, rather than waiting for someone to see their application

Possible downsides
None.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SoggyShorts

Well-Known Member
search fs.png
search fs2.png

FS tags like above but replaced with "Tournament focused" "teaching FS" etc
 
Last edited:

Richord

Well-Known Member
well, I rather have a well working game or better; a good tradesystem. things we use every day/every week opposed to 'sometimes'.

edit: I'm certainly not against it, but as said: I rather have functions for daily use.
 

SoggyShorts

Well-Known Member
well, I rather have a well working game or better; a good tradesystem. things we use every day/every week opposed to 'sometimes'.
edit: I'm certainly not against it, but as said: I rather have functions for daily use.
It's not an either/or situation though is it?
I mean I'd rather have the ability to queue all of my armories in one click like I can with my workshops, but since we know that would only take a few lines of code I'm not going to suggest that instead of implementing a FS search feature. One has nothing to do with the other, and my preference for armory queues over FS searching is irrelevant.
 

UlyssesBlue

Well-Known Member
I love the search feature you propose, @SoggyShorts. Being able to tag your fellowship with a handful of pre-made labels would be a simple but effective means to categorise fellowships for search purposes.

@Pauly7 Even if Inno doesn't keep track of that sort of thing yet, it should be easy enough to just start. We only need an average of the 3 or so most recent tournaments to get a useful figure. A rolling average would be best anyway, as it shows how the fellowship is currently performing, and won't be influenced by how it was performing a long time ago.
 

Richord

Well-Known Member
@SoggyShorts I don't agree. I do not know anything about the coding part; I just don't care enough.
I know what I see and that is that we don't get important suggestions that are sometimes as old as the game (in some form)
and what do we get? all kinds of stuff that is usually somewhat of an improvement, but that's it.
I would easily exchange 5-10 of the last 'up'grades for eg a new trade-system.
to me; the devs work on all kinds of things, except on our suggestions that are sometimes years old.
 

SoggyShorts

Well-Known Member
to me; the devs work on all kinds of things, except on our suggestions that are sometimes years old.
I just don't see how it's very useful or constructive feedback on this idea to bring up that you want something totally unrelated to be taken care of first.
Take all of the small suggestions together and we're talking about under 100 hours of labor so it's not really about priorities at all, just how good ideas are and where they fit into inno's existing roadmap.

BTW, is this: https://beta.forum.elvenar.com/index.php?threads/reform-trader.11963/ what you mean by better trading system? It seems to me like just about everything we asked for has been implemented there.
 

Richord

Well-Known Member
it is important, because being positve about 20new idea's while we have a bunch of old ones and more important ones, is ok, but not the whole 'story'.
trader? we want to be able to uncheck cross tier and less than 2 stars. from the start this was introduced. among other stuf.

so; in short: sure; good idea, but fix other things first.
 

Marindor

Well-Known Member
Thank you all for voting. Unfortunately this idea didn't meet the minimum requirements, so it will now be archived.
 
Top