Refinding our community principles around vehicle assets

[HellHarry]

Smashin that why we need more TG people to command and have VOIP. This way you can get CO order for your asset and then get to repport the guy for not following CO order. It's often hard to get those because not alot of TG people CO often, I know I do not, but if we would all CO once in a while most of the armor map would result in gunship squad getting gunship and so on.

[Tllyx]

So after thinking a lot of this over, here is what I see.

TG has a line system. TG has an admin reporting system.

It sucks when someone jumps in an asset that you want. It sucks because your asset squad is sitting there doing nothing until that asset has respawned. Unless there is a CO assigning that asset to you, we must wait for it. The TG answer is not false reporting, TKing, swearing at them etc...

If you are jumped in line after the asset has respawned, report them. TG has this wonderful system and as far as I can see, it's a bit clunky but it works.

*** A problem I commonly see is that people lose faith in the admins because,
1) There isn't one online
2) The offending player does not see the warnings. It is very difficult to see warning text when it is scrolling by so quickly.
3) By the time the offending player is kicked, there may only be 20 tickets left.

Once Faith is lost, the players take it into their own hands, which is not the right answer. It's very easy to lose your temper or patience.

My request is more towards the admins. There have been very few instances that I have seen where the server has lacked an admin, which is outstanding. In my opinion, we could honestly use 1-2 more to overlap those times that the server is lacking any type of control.


Mantis - Bringing up points like this is a great highlight to remind the community for what we stand for. It's easy to read these SOPs the day you put on that TG tag, however, it is also easy to forget some points after a year has gone by.

[sordavie]

Here's what happens when you play only on TG and you respect the named assets squad and stuff:

Sordavie
134 hours total time played
5 mins total time in gunship

[Greyed]

And now I'm being asked to let others jump in lines in front me, take assets and waste them, and keep smiling the whole time about.

I don't think anyone said you had to smile about it. A bit of hyperbole on your part? My post was not to take it but not to stoop to their level and engage in the very same behavior that you're complaining about. Two different things.

After all, it was only another pub player that didn't know the rules. Well it gets old after a short while.

Today's Pubbie is tomorrow's TG member. Yeah, it gets old. That's the downside of high expectations for gameplay. Sometimes people don't meet 'em. Doesn't mean you abandon your expectations but educate people to bring them up to the standards set by the community.

However only after you've attempted to educate, not stooped to their level and gotten no response do you have the moral authority to request further action.

[INSUNABULA]

---so the conclusion can only be - if both sides whine equally the balance in the rotation should be just perfect !

---a good compromise means there are two unhappy people *cue laugh track*

As far as the gunship is viewed - It should be considered a member of every single squad on the team and this is why:

1) A gunship can more effectively take out armor if it knows where it is.
2) The pilot consults the Mini-map religiously -and trust me on that-
3) As an infantry squad all you need to do is continue to spot the aggravating piece of armor until the gunship takes out the trash. Essentially, if you're really patent and even without a CO or even an SL involved you can call-in your own mini "air-strike" when your friendly gunship pays a visit.

When Comms are in full effect with a competent and vocal CO and SLs then doing this becomes even easier:

"Commander this is squad X we have an armor problem"
"I'll contact 'Gunship' squad and let them know - order your squad to keep spotting the armor until it's gone"
"Gunship squad this is the commander. Squad X has an armor problem at flag X and has the target spotted"

Done.

It is a member of every squad and all you have to do is communicate properly to reap the benefits.

[Smachin007]

Here's what happens when you play only on TG and you respect the named assets squad and stuff:

Sordavie
134 hours total time played
5 mins total time in gunship

Take the initiative to create your own asset squad then. If you want to gunship ask for an invite in TS, or Immediatley create a gunship squad at the start of the round before someone else. I know I usually try and wait 30 seconds to 1 minute before making a Gunship squad, just to give others the chance to do it. But then no one does, so then I make one. You can't just sit back and not say anything and expect to get invites to them. You have to make yourself known.

[asch]

I'm going to reiterate the point of the original post. We expect all players to demonstrate maturity and respect to others. If we're unable to follow those basic principles then we'll need to rethink our time here at this community. I realize we all get frustrated by various things, but that is not an excuse for some of the actions that are occurring.

If the main reason for TG not endorsing "named asset squads" is because we want newcomers to have an equal share of the pie then perhaps we can look at this from a different angle:

This is not the main reason so your deductions do not quite hold up.

The purpose of named squads is to help coordination and teamwork.

The reason named squads are not rules is due to the fact that they are not the only way to coordinate and have teamwork. There is also a technical aspect in that we constantly see the same folks with higher performing computers join the round and make these squads before others.

A lot of what I'm seeing are the admin's clashing down on the subscribers to TG who make this community.

Let me clarify this...

Subscribers do not make up TG. Subscribers help fund us and keep the lights on, however it is all of our members, subscribers or not that make up this community.

The community would also not survive if we shutout or are disrespectful towards new players. Membership churns over the years. We need to constantly bring new players into the folds. Being mature, respectful and helpful to these new players is the first step.

You can't continue faulting the members of TG for the problems pubbies create. I am not going to be given less respect than your average pubbie when I am donating to this server.

The problems we're seeing are not one-sided. As the cliche goes "two wrongs do not make a right"... the actions shown by players in response to other actions is not what we want to see around here.

You are not being shown any less respect than any other player. Donating does not entitle you to more or less respect. When players are being immature and disrespectful they are doing a disservice to this community and its members.

But I am also one of those players that has no problem waiting in line for the gunship, AS LONG AS THE OTHER PLAYER DOES IT TOO. I can't count the number of times that I have stood back and let someone else take the gunship because they were waiting for it first, just to turn around and have the same player take the gunship the next time it spawns, even though I've been standing there waiting for it. If you're telling me I can't report that and expect action to be taken for it, then naturally I'm not gonna stand in line anymore. I'm gonna take the gunship every chance I get, without any regard for some stupid line that is underneath others, so why can't it be underneath me.

I realize emotions are playing into your comments, but this is not the correct way to handle things.

The admins are not going to police a line for assets. There will be cases where someone may not realize there is a line or understand that this is how we play on this server. If others are not following this practice then what we're trying to say is first try to maturely address it with the individual. Often times that other player will respond maturely and the issue will resolve itself.

If and when we come across players who repeatedly disregard working together with others on the server, then bring it up with the admin team.

[Exploding_Silver]

I think the admin position on this is well thought out and correct



.

[Zoraster]

To which part Silver? I think it's correct insofar as the rule goes, and wrong insofar as the SOP suggests TG members should form lines, etc. waiting for assets despite there being named squads.

[Smachin007]

I realize emotions are playing into your comments, but this is not the correct way to handle things.

Then what is the correct way?

The admins are not going to police a line for assets. There will be cases where someone may not realize there is a line or understand that this is how we play on this server. If others are not following this practice then what we're trying to say is first try to maturely address it with the individual. Often times that other player will respond maturely and the issue will resolve itself.

If and when we come across players who repeatedly disregard working together with others on the server, then bring it up with the admin team.

I do ask nicely, I don't say this like "Get the [Insert] out" or anything of the such. I simply ask them to remove themselves from the gunner's seat so that my squad mate can gun for me. When they don't respond what am I supposed to? You just told me that Admin's won't kick b/c of a cases like that. I don't have commander orders to have the Gunship, but I am in the pilot's seat and I do have a squad mate who I'm working with to create a team for the gunship. Are you saying that I should fly with this person in my gunner seat and just tell my gunner he is out of luck...that's not right. Am I supposed to get out of the gunship and let them have it...that's not right. Am I supposed to invite them to my squad that consists of 2 people, because only 2 people can fit in a gunship, and then have myself or my gunner give them our spot...that's not right. Am I supposed to tell them to "Go [Insert] themselves"...that's not right.

Do you see the problem, if the admin team does not make a clear concise decision on how these instances are handled, then all there is going to be is trouble.

[asch]

To which part Silver? I think it's correct insofar as the rule goes, and wrong insofar as the SOP suggests TG members should form lines, etc. waiting for assets despite there being named squads.

A named asset squad servers a purpose. It allows a squad to identify the type of squad they are to other team members. This can be beneficial to team coordination. It can also help a commander utilize a squad a certain way.

But a named squad is not the only way to utilize certain assets. An asset can be part of a full squad and still offer coordination and teamwork.

Then what is the correct way?

There isn't necessarily a single (right) way to deal with this situation. My approach would be to first reach out to this other individual. Let them know that your squad already has a gunner and you would like to fly with him. Inform him that the next spawn of the asset he can pilot or gun.

You can also ask him to join your squad so you all can communicate more effectively. While that leaves an extra man on the ground, that extra man can also be helpful. He can spot targets or act as a radio man communicating with other squads while your hands are busy flying / gunning.

In both of those cases everyone was acting maturely and respectful to each other. And hopefully this new player is beginning to understand how we play at TG and eventually become a long-standing contributing team player.

Now if after a honest attempt to communicate / work-out the issue with this other player has resulted in both of you sitting in the asset you are left with two options. Fly and let the other guy gun. Or jump out and let him take off. These aren't necessarily the best options but are events that happen on a public server. At this point we can start noting the players name and if there is repeat behavior then report the individual.

Do you see the problem, if the admin team does not make a clear concise decision on how these instances are handled, then all there is going to be is trouble.

As I noted there isn't a single right way to handle this type of behavior. We can only offer suggestions. We can say that retaliation, immaturity and disrespect is the wrong way to handle it.

[Zoraster]

A named asset squad servers a purpose. It allows a squad to identify the type of squad they are to other team members. This can be beneficial to team coordination. It can also help a commander utilize a squad a certain way.

But a named squad is not the only way to utilize certain assets. An asset can be part of a full squad and still offer coordination and teamwork.

I did not try to imply otherwise. Only that our SOP should not endorse taking a named asset squad's vehicles without CO consent. I think by saying that a TG member "should" start waiting in line for vehicles does not promote goal oriented game play because in part it can create people just hanging out in the uncap.

I agree that vehicles can sometimes be used in squads effectively... though some do it better than others. A gunship in a 6 person squad is pretty useless. A walker can be useful in some situations.

Because of motion mines, railguns, emp nades, CO emps, and the general fragility of armor, though, the experience in 2142 cannot be completely compared to bf2. Armor in 2142 has to have a lot more independence just to stay alive.

[INSUNABULA]

The reason named squads are not rules is due to the fact that they are not the only way to coordinate and have teamwork.

But they are a great way to "coordinate and have teamwork" none the less - at the end of the day, shouldn't that be supported?

There is also a technical aspect in that we constantly see the same folks with higher performing computers join the round and make these squads before others.

But this isn't all the time - just today on Tunis you couldn't have given our Walker away and just sat at our UCB for 50% of the game and no sign of a "Walker" squad. It's just a question of timing and luck like most things in this game.

[Lorax74]

But this isn't all the time - just today on Tunis you couldn't have given our Walker away and just sat at our UCB for 50% of the game and no sign of a "Walker" squad. It's just a question of timing and luck like most things in this game.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying that because there wasn't a walker squad, the asset went unused? If that is what you are saying, then I think that speaks to the fact that we rely too much on named asset squads.

[Greyed]

To which part Silver? I think it's correct insofar as the rule goes, and wrong insofar as the SOP suggests TG members should form lines, etc. waiting for assets despite there being named squads.

That's where the Gentleman's Agreement comes in. It covers those areas where we, as the players, feel the rules don't go far enough. Granted it has all the power of a non-binding UN resolution (or a binding one, for that matter) but by-and-large TGers who signed that agreement have respected the additional restrictions therein.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying that because there wasn't a walker squad, the asset went unused? If that is what you are saying, then I think that speaks to the fact that we rely too much on named asset squads.

Or that noone asked the CO if they could have the Walker because they presumed another squad had it from seeing them use it earlier in the round. Overreliance on the CO?