Results 61 to 71 of 71
Thread: The Great Cull
09-06-2014, 12:39 AM #61
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Yeah, chiming in here as someone who doesn't particular care how this outfit is seen by other outfits. In my mind, that's not it's purpose.I am on the Steemz
09-06-2014, 02:25 AM #62
@CMaster I'd be grateful if you could be a bit more constructive than your last few comments, what you've said is essentially pointless and jarring. I respect your opinion and i'm not undermining where you're coming from at all, but when you take things that i have said and blow them out of proportion and context, and then drag things on - that's not on.
What you've said doesn't reflect my views or feelings on this topic and that in itself is pretty frustrating considering how clear i have tried to be. I can see and regret that you cant seem to understand the things i've said, or the reasons or logic behind them. (I suggest that you read the first paragraph again to get the relevance part). However, others have, so i can't really offer any more consolation.
Last edited by NickWhite; 09-06-2014 at 02:28 AM.Steam - Nick
09-06-2014, 03:38 AM #63
Nick and I have been discussing this issue a little in mumble. It is clear to see that there is a large divide in opinions about something that should be a fairly simple matter.
The main issue here is a question of "do we or don't we?".
The secondary question is a matter of "if we do, how do we do it?".
Ultimately, this kind of stuff is now down to the council to come up with, and so I think the discussion would best be served by coming up with a list of pros and cons for 'the serene seven' to discuss.
These points have been taken from the discussion thus far.
Do we or don't we?:
- Nick suggested that if left unattended, there is a potential for the outfit to expand to a point where the community could divide into small groups.
- The idea that we could in some way combat people using our RPS tag to badly represent the outfit and cause annoyance within the community.
- The idea that people using RPS tags that are playing solo may negatively impact reputation; That people playing solo with RPS tags should not be a part of the outfit if they do not play with us.
- The need to appear reputable in game. The argument that stats may affect how we are seen as an outfit to potential newcomers. Stats and reputation affect on longevity in game as an outfit. prospective players will look for the most reputable outfit, and this will allow growth.
- RPS front page PS2 hype is long gone. We need new methods for maintaining recruitment. C2As are few and far between.
- De clutter. The stats look messy. (silly entry)
- Culling members could improve our ratings within the new outfit recruitment system. Lots of players, many of which are low levels, could affect the overall stats balance.
- Not culling reinforces the view that our outfit is a 'zergfit'. This is viewed negatively, because being on the end of one can be a generally bad experience.
- There is a danger that kicking people out could cause a divide, as well as potential upset to those affected.
- We cant really guarantee that we are kicking non-excellent people just by culling. We need other methods, such as the proposed reddit post.
- The argument that we should not deny people in the RPS Planetside 2 outfit the right to play solo with our tags if they truly wish to (as long as they respect the golden rule). The outfit is meant for those who read RPS to join us and play the game (whether with or without us is up to them). Is there any real need to cull members when our roots have always been as an open outfit?
- Why kick people with RPS tags that do play the game? Shouldn't we make more of an effort to try and reclaim these members and get them to play with us?
- No clear evidence that stats have a large impact on recruitment. Possibility that having more members could in fact be a benefit to the new outfit recruitment system. More effort could be put into alternative methods, i.e. description of our outfits persona on recruitment sites/in game.
- Culling is a nasty word. (counter silly entry)
- The culling process (if one of the more search heavy methods was chosen, i.e. going through names) would be very time consuming and negate any value the cull would have. Time could be spent elsewhere.
- Argument that zerg game play isn't necessarily bad or any less fun, and that we shouldn't necessarily be conforming to other outfit views. Zergs can be seen as a challenge to overcome, rather than an unstoppable force.
- How do we gauge who is and isnt playing with us? We cant use mumble alone to determine whether somebody plays with us? People might join in game in platoons without speaking.
- No longer able to view outfit history in stat form.
IF we do:
- Cull BR 1's only - (Note that this would be a quick and simple compromise)
Shouldn't cause a problem as BR1s clearly do not play with us any longer.
Possible argument by some that this might not be enough of a cull.
Counter argument that we could see how this works, and possibly cull further in the future.
- Cull up to BR 5-10 that have not played within x months + post warnings on forum -
Again, shouldn't be a problem if we are only concerned with keeping the current player base in tact.
Argument that there is the potential for people who are on hiatus to be kicked out. They may not spot the post telling them that there will be a cull in time to act.
How close should X months be?
- Cull all those names that the council do not recognise as playing with us at the current time who have been missing for x amount of time -
Chances are high that at least one of the sexy seven would recognise the name.
There is a danger that people could slip through the net.
NOTE: Best bet to give fair warning regardless of which method.
This is not a cover all solution. Not all members read the forums.
Added: Need to have forum signup be mandatory?
Disclaimer: This is by no means a complete list. I have done my best from what I can see, and have asked Nick to have another look over this tomorrow (Monday). I will update it if needs be to include more on either side.
The point of this is to provide a structured basis for discussion when it is discussed by the council. Please feel free to suggest additions, or changes.
Last edited by BasicPauly; 09-06-2014 at 03:41 AM.Steam: basicpaul | Origin: BasicPaul
09-06-2014, 09:09 AM #64
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
I'm not sure why asking any questions of the plan to clarify things or broader questions (like Riz and someone else asked earlier in the thread) needs immediately shouting down either.
Oh, and never thought I'd say this but: That was a useful post, Paul. I have a better idea of what's being driven at here (although I think most of it ends up being a much broader issue than just relating to roster size)
09-06-2014, 09:14 AM #65
09-06-2014, 09:55 AM #66
Also, probably very offtopic, Paul and nick, you can stop pretending you guys dont talk over the phone.
09-06-2014, 10:05 AM #67
09-06-2014, 10:23 AM #68
Originally Posted by Cephas
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
09-06-2014, 10:35 AM #69
- Join Date
- May 2013
You are never going to get it 100% right, make the best effort you can at the time, if a player that gets culled accidently or wants back in they can simply ask.GW2: fersumengin, Ulstermen, Hera Tempastatis
Planetside 2: Fersumengin, (VS) Fersumengine (NC)
09-06-2014, 04:18 PM #70
Tend to chat in mumble when nothing else is going on though.
Uh... Thanks? Really not sure whether to be offended or happy :P.
Ive made plenty of useful posts before :'(
Anyway, I'm fairly on the fence, and can see both sides of it, which is why I thought it best to just write up a list of issues and take it from there. Like I said, its kind of a small issue when you think about it, but its one that has the potential to cause controversy, so its worth dealing with properly.
Last edited by BasicPauly; 09-06-2014 at 04:20 PM.Steam: basicpaul | Origin: BasicPaul
12-06-2014, 11:37 AM #71
Jesus, Joseph and doggy style Mary, please don't kick this all up again, I just want this point to be recorded for when the debate comes after the outfit recruitment changes:
Cherry, a BR~27 joined us last night after an absence of a year or so, and jumped straight into the PL seat for the evening. I don't think many are proposing clearing up to that kind of BR, but I thought it a point worth weighing when the time comes.