Freyd

Each of the three poll questions had various strong points and shakier elements.  Rather than skew either way, I’ll just skip the poll and offer the following as creative feedback.  It’s also worth acknowledging how hard it can be to plan for raids when the designer doesn’t yet know who will be participating while creating the boss.  Mad respect for those of you who put in the effort.  Hopefully, some of what follows is useful.

1. Narrative

• Honestly, this raid’s narrative struggled a bit regarding engagement.  The text itself was great, but was often so heavy with internal monologue that it left players with little they could sink their keyboards into and few clues to help solve the various mechanical puzzles.  Constructively, a bit more direct interaction or even just descriptive effects would have been heartily welcomed.
• Narratively, the Ronbaru event seemed strangely more important from a plot perspective than the raid battle itself, likely also affected per above.  It wasn’t possible to keep up with three raid threads plus the Ronbaru thread, so consider this impression as strictly superficial.  More obvious connections between the two might have helped them both.

2. Mechanics

Pros:

• Great mechanical innovation, particularly in phase 2 and in making lesser used features mean something.  
• Phase 2 required good planning and encouraged teamwork, while also incorporating luck as a factor. This was very well done.
• Love the idea of making tanking and support roles have a greater range of function.  In practice, both struggled a bit with that in phase 1, but gained  functionality back in spades in phase 2.  Suggestion: have players define their roles going into the raid, granting each abilities or benefits that only last for that raid.  Also recommend exploring partial effects when boss attacks fail.  This could help with tanks and support utility.
• It was a good call to reveal the boss stats in phase 2, especially given its complexity.  The fog of war seriously hurt phase 1’s fun factor.
• Avoiding the immunity trap.  Thank you!!!  Providing disables with alternative effects was excellent.  More of this would be great.  Nothing is less satisfying than: you just can't use that.

Cons:

• Some of the new mechanics were significant departures from traditional builds and roles (actually a pro), but certain builds may have struggled to remain effective as a result.  Not the end of the world, but may have reduced the fun factor for some, which can kill writer post motivation.  Would love to hear from others if they felt this way (it helps staff to know!)
• It felt like there were probably a few too many effects in play at the same time, especially when people struggled to understand their interactions.  Could be a buzzkill for those who really dislike to math.  Consider setting a vague mechanics theme for the next raid to help players prepare as they see fit (e.g. bring your pep pills (EN sus), play with your opposites (foly, opposing elements, etc.), your hate means nothing (load up on taunt-procs), etc.)  Maybe through the rumour mechanic?  It’s impossible to be prepared for everything, yet failing a raid due to broad or completely unforeseeable factors could hinder player motivation to participate.  Not easy to balance.
• Likewise, mechanical puzzles relying on clever reading of system can struggle if the community’s understanding of those mechanics may be inconsistent.  Not easily solvable, just more of an observation.  We all appreciate how staff are always working to improve and clarify the system.

3. Length

• Running multiple parties simultaneously was a huge improvement and a definite win. Waiting for other group rotations in previous raids was terribly disengaging and dragged raids out horribly. Pacing felt much more engaging, though I can only imagine how exhausting this must have been for staff.  
• Given that multiple players had reached the end of their energy reserves suggests that, mechanically, the fight was probably as long as it could truly afford to be.  This even impacted players who had leaned into sustainability in their builds.
• Ultimately, phase 1 felt very unnecessary.  Opening the raid with multiple rotations of meatbag-pounding attrition was also rather muse-killing.  It felt a lot like wailing on a punching bag with indeterminate hit points without making any discernable headway and drained writer motivation as much or more than their characters’ EN.  Likely best avoided in the future.
• Consider keeping raids to a shorter duration, overall.  Not every raid needs to reach the point of exhaustion in order to achieve a dramatic crescendo.  Brief and intense can work just as well, or sometimes better.  It’s also a lot easier on staff.

Thank you again to everyone who contributed to planning and running the raid.  I know how draining it can be.

Cheers.

Providing staff some sort of reward for the time they invest in the game is fair and reasonable.  It is an investment of their own personal time that they could otherwise spend on developing their own characters and stories.  Figuring out a suitable reward is the tricky part.  Linking it to effort put in as staff (via word count, threads closed, etc.) is a good metric.  My only concern is whether col is the most suitable reward.

It's really not hard to earn col in the game.  You can earn six figures from a single grind thread rather easily, at max level, making the standard page reward and the proposed staff reward rather insignificant.  It's also easy to appreciate that anything too substantial could provoke a negative reaction from the community.  Kudos to staff for taking the time and effort to put this poll out for feedback.

It's unlikely that a single type of reward will be meaningful for everyone, so perhaps a small range of minor perks could be provided to help offset time lost for threading:

1. +10% EXP to a single thread reward once per month(basically, a separate staff perk version of the mega slime farm)
2. EXP reward for word count for staff/site content generated (can only be assigned to one character)
3. Use of a free Crafter's Respite once every calendar week.
4. Some small col-related benefit, possibly including the reward proposed above.

Lastly, being on staff is a commitment that carries both privileges and responsibilities. If tangible rewards are to be considered, they should probably be accompanied by formal guidelines for dealing with inactivity or absence.   No one should expect to remain parked on the staff roster indefinitely without contributing.  Burning out isn't good for anyone's mental/physical health, and staying on while losing interest isn't fair to the rest of the site.