Atomic Dog

There was no "shift of blame" in my post. In fact, the point was to correct the statements you made which were, indeed, wrong.

__________________

Trooper

what was this post about again. Can we get it cleaned up or move this type of discussion to another thread.


And isnt it operation flashpoint not operation frontlines?

asch

Let's take a step back and all breath. Like we mentioned in the original post there are going to be differences of opinion. We should be striving to understand these different perspectives in a mature and respectful manner.

Something we all have to be very careful of is the "tone" that we read and write into our posts. Tone is not easily comprehended with the written word. The reader often times doesn't read the tone that the writer implied which can lead to conflict.

---

We need to be careful when we call someone a "Tactical" gamer vs a "non-Tactical" gamer. This is a very subjective statement and will often come off the wrong way. Games like Team Fortress, World of Warcraft, Armed Assault, Battlefield, World in Conflict, etc. (the list goes on) all employ some form of tactics. Players that are working as a team are using some form of tactics. These are all "Tactical" gamers.

As mentioned in the original post, Tactical Gamer had traditionally focused on the games that had a more "realistic" form and feature set. We branched out into other titles like Battlefield 2. The number of players world-wide in a game like Armed Assault is drastically smaller than the number of players in Battlefield 2. To give an example, game-monitor reports around 12,000 players playing Armed Assault while there are around 140,000 players still playing Battlefield 2. That means Armed Assault has less than 8% of those total players. Following those numbers it would be assumed that the ratio of Armed Assault players vs Battlefield players would be similar.

Tactical Gamer has not become any less supportive of titles like Armed Assault, rather we've extended our reach to players who want to enjoy teamwork and objective-based play in a mature environment.

If all new membership is here for titles like Battlefield or Team Fortress and not for games like Armed Assault then it sounds like those latter two titles need to work on getting the Tactical Gamer name out and recruit players. I believe that Armed Assault is doing well and it is the perception that is incorrect due to the reversal in the percentage of players.

Unfortunately something that has been growing here is a rift between the players of these various game titles. It's becoming an "us" vs. "them" issue. Using the terms "action" gamer vs. "tactical" gamer is an example of this rift. We are ALL Tactical Gamers who happen to have different preferences. I like blue. Joe Bob likes red. We're still Tactical Gamer's. We're still mature players who want teamwork and objective-based play.

This rift is one factor that goes into less community involvement. If a player is scorned for their preference then they are less likely to be responsive and participate in community discussions. If a player's opinion is heard, listened to, and understood then that will lead to more involvement.

When Tactical Gamer hosted a vanilla battlefield 2 server there was quite a bit of community involvement. After action reports often times had multiple pages of responses. There wasn't an "us" vs. "them" issue within that player group.

Other factors can lead into less involvement. A player can drown in posts here and end up skimming instead of participating. Some players may be interested in interacting with the community on the game server and not in the forums. They are still involved.

Tactical Gamer recognizes that we can definitely use more participation in the forums. We're taking steps to rectify that. We've begun to include AAR's in our weekly updates. We're working with the admin teams to get them on the same page and help bridge the gap between players. We're working towards solutions and not just saying the involvement is gone.

In-house squads are another factor playing into the community involvement. IHS members will often times be the most noisy....er... communicative players on the forums. They generate a lot of competitive spirit and excitement. This was demonstrated within the battlefield series games.

However the IHS system has become another "us" vs "them" issue. Some players who are not a part of the IHS system will scorn those that are. This continues to grow a rift between players.

In-house squads are an invaluable piece to growing Tactical Gamer. They provide a mechanism for players to train, practice, and compete together as part of the Tactical Gamer team. One of the purposes of the IHS system is to increase the strategy, tactics, and teamwork utilized on the servers and in many cases this has worked.

Now the IHS system is not without problems. It is a work in progress and will evolve over time. The IHS leaders have been brought together to discuss these issues and work towards resolutions that will benefit Tactical Gamer.

Just as we have issues with players, the IHS system, the community, we also have issues with administration. Nobody is perfect here and we don't expect them to be. Tactical Gamer will work with players and administrators to increase communication, bring the administrative teams together and form a consistent pattern, and enhance the Tactical Gamer community. The administrators have been brought to a round-table to discuss community issues, player issues, administration issues, etc.

Publicly complaining about administration is just as bad about publicly complaining about Joe Bob. It's not the correct form or fashion to get things resolved. Contact the game officer or contact the TG administration.

All in all the direction and goals of Tactical Gamer has not changed. Our niche is still mature, teamwork oriented gaming with a focus on objectives. It will take work to continue to grow and foster the community and repair the rifts that are being created. It's going to take the involvement of everyone.

Some folks may feel like what they had is lost. Others may feel like they're not getting what they desire. The responsibility is on everyone to make Tactical Gamer a better community. Tactical Gamer will not be for everyone but we are for mature, teamwork objective-based players. Complaining about what we're not isn't going to get us anywhere. Open mature discussion that drives towards resolutions will move us forward.

__________________
| My Maps

Gaming Videos by Tactical Gamers

Fear the Frog! | Kill the Frog! | An Inconvenient Truth

"Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine, regardless of the level of advantage, if any, it gives over the opposing team." -- Tactical Gamer Primer

Fignut

I would like to thank Magnum for his comment on this thread, as well as, those who commented here afterwards. His comments have created dialogue. I think this is exactly what any organization needs to do in order to move in a possitive direction--TG is no different.
It is good to examine the reasons why we do the things we do, and more importantly to question these reasons. I am not saying there should be huge wide sweeping changes, but rather a re-examination. This, IMHO, is what the forums are for. It is a venue to express our opinions and ideas, without fear of ridicule or attack. It might have been a French dude who said "I may not agree to what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it", but he was spot on. But hey that's is just my opinion be it right or wrong.

__________________
|TG-Irr|fignut

NorCalRoach

Great discussion. I absolutely appreciate you posting this Asch. Magnum- I understand your points and I agree on some level with what you wrote. I was an active member in a very active in-house squad that was competitive and fun. They choose to move on for reasons that they felt were strong enough to push them away and I'm sorry for that, but it was a decision made by the majority of the group. It's comforting knowing that those issues are getting addressed, particularly the issue regarding the misconception of realism vs action players. Asch hit it on the nail with this statement:
One thing is certain- this community is experiencing some growing pains but it'll continue to be a fantastic community for mature gamers. I've met a lot of good people here.

__________________
.

ednos

Two things:

1. The 4th does not fit your description. When we play ArmA, we don't isolate ourselves. Everyone on the server works together. In fact, when we split off into smaller subdivisions in the game, usually the 4th has its tentacles in each one instead of bunching up. Your evaluation fails on that point because it's a direct contradiction of reality, although you probably just never had the chance to see it. Also, when it comes to games like PCS and Call of Duty, each team is one whole team, not subdivided by any game mechanism, so in-house squads really can't operate as you've described.
2. Playing with an anonymous mass of players is not nearly as effective as playing with people you know. I can operate alongside members of the 4th with much greater ease than I can other members of the community because I spend a lot more time gaming with them. I simply don't have the time to dedicate the same to every person who plays a particular game, and I'm far more effective in a unit comprised primarily of familiar players. The IHS really fits this structural need perfectly.

__________________

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~ Bertrand Russell
I have a tendency to key out three or four things and then let them battle for supremacy while I key, so there's a lot of backspacing as potential statements are slaughtered and eaten by the victors. ~ Magna Centipede

thedogwarrior

Good original post Asch, and good discussion following. Everyone has their own opinions, and it's good that for the most part, in this thread, and elsewhere in the TG community, that people are respectful of others.

I for one am glad that my son and I found 2142 when we did, and was delighted to discover a vibrant BF2/POE community here... I haven't been playing online games that long, but the last couple of years, I'm very glad that I found TG. Hands down, TG is the best online gaming you'll find.

__________________

|TG-8th| Mercs * New to TG? Start Here * Become a Supporting Member

Elwenil

I think Magnum brings up a lot of good points. And maybe that has a lot to do with the fact that he and I have been members of this forum for a long time. I remember what TG was when the focus was on games like Ghost Recon and Joint Ops. It was truly "Tactical" and was very serious to a certain extent. Quite honestly, I was intimidated by TG when I first played with them. I can remember getting fussed at by Luna about talking on comms after I was dead, lol. It was a different time for sure. I was involved with the Ghost Team Alpha (=GsTA=) clan for a time and didn't play much on TG servers until America's Army started getting more popular. I played a few times with Magnum and while it was tactical, it was a bit more laid back than what I had previously known as TG. As things are now, I have to agree with Magnum that TG has become more and more "action" and less "tactical". I think this has a lot to do with the focus shifting from "tactical/realism" to "action/simulation". I combined the two ideas, since I feel they are pretty much the same thing as in the Address.

When I first came to know TG, a game like CoD4 would have been laughed out of the community. The online play is about as realistic and tactical as flying monkeys. But things change and I suppose TG must change with the times. There is always the niche markets that are unhappy about a product because the manufacturer changed things to suit the masses so they can get more sales, and TG is in a lot of ways selling a product since it must support itself. I don't knock it, and I completely understand it. It's still sad to see so much running around in games these days when things used to be much slower and deliberate. We try to get as tactical as possible in Project Reality, but the BF2 engine limitations and some players find it hard to break vanilla BF2 habits. I have ArmA, and hope to get into it soon as soon as things calm down with our new squad getting settled in and working out SOPs. I definitely miss America's Army and would happily and enthusiastically support any return to it but I know we are few and far between.

I also would agree that some IHS activities have made it discouraging for new players sometimes but I also would argue that with the changing "feel" of TG, like minded players tend to want to congregate together, regardless of them being in an IHS or not. An IHS just sort of "formalizes" it and puts a name to it. Some gamers take their games more seriously, like I do, and others have a more "it's just a game", "have fun" attitude. I have fun also, but with a different style. In some ways this sort of thing polarizes TG into different camps, much like the "old school" vs "new school" thing. In some ways this is inevitable due to the size of TG. Either way, the 10th TG Squad is making efforts to not exclude other TG members or public players. Anyone is more than welcome to join one of our squads and hopefully get involved in true to the TG Primer style play. We do have certain nights where we are training or practicing where we will lock the squad down to just |TG-X| members and those days are still a little up in the air and have to be finalized, but other than that, anyone is welcome to jump in and have fun.

In conclusion, TG has changed a lot in the last few years. As I said, it is inevitable, but I don't consider it a bad thing necessarily. I feel that, as a community, we should probably focus more on the things that have brought us together more than the things that make us different. Play whatever style game you like, but remember to focus on the intent of the game and it's objectives. Some games are more action, and some are more tactical. When in Rome...

__________________
|TG|Elwenil

TheSkudDestroyer

After reading this thread I can only offer my own experience in all the struggles that do occur within TG.

For a while the 6th was the only IHS active with PR. This...was really bad. It did describe alot of the problems Magnum brought up. A lot - I mean A LOT of players expected TG-6th to carry a team each night. They expected invites to our squads. They expected us to be super soldiers. Fingers would point subtlety at the 6th when there were too many "TG's" on one side. Team stacking was being argued about every other week. Admin coverage was becoming a problem, and with the 6th having 4 admins for PR...

I couldnt help but think that other people on the server thought the 6th might have a bit too many admins. I do not mean to bring up bad blood, but there is certainly resentment on both sides on what happened with TF2 and the 7th.

(I'll leave my personal opinions out of it. TG-7th/TG7/F are still to be treated with the amount of respect you would treat any TG- tag wearer or any guest on our servers.)

But now... we have the 10th Tactical Guard and a full flock of E1st guys on the server EVERY day. Just in the past month it seems the community went from bickering every day to only bickering on the forum

It helps. It helps alot. It helps promote the teamwork and leadership that TG offers.

__________________
|TG-6th|Skud, NA Deputy Lead Tester

jb4

Respectfully, we have a very different point of view and part of that may be that we inhabit different parts of the community, ie, games. November 2006 was when I was first introduced to TG playing POE. The thing that struck me from the very first day was the fact that the IHS guys here were actually glad I was here to play and learn unlike just about everywhere where else I played before that. I learned the TG way from guys and gals wearing the TG tags because they were proud to share it. I am just one of many who went on to become an annual SM because of that (just renewed again). I played for months here without any TG or IHS tag and was treated as a welcomed member of any squad I joined. A significant amount of what I have learned about playing the games came from IHS members of the 12th, 5th, 33rd and 7th to name a few. One of the most important things an IHS can do, IMO, is promote the TG way, promote the games, promote new player development, and through that process, bring in more SMs into the fold. From the part of the server I have been playing on; POE2, COD4 and FFOW, it appears to be: Mission Accomplished. I have seen scores of players just like me wear the TG tags, become SM's and eventually become part of an IHS to keep the cycle moving forward. We are all stewards of the game and our server whether you wear the tags or not. I can think of at least 40 people right now who are in the process of bonding with this community and deciding if they will become an SM and/or add the TG tags to their name. I will bet everything that they would tell anyone they fell just as welcome and just as valued as anyone. That is one of the many things that makes TG great and the IHS are a big part of it. I hope your future experiences bring you closer to seeing what I see here.

__________________

POE2 2.5 Overview | How to get started with POE2 (for free)

Iamthefallen

An observation and a suggestion:
I find it somewhat interesting that this thread in turn has mostly been about the existence and significance of problems rather than attempts to identify solutions and implementing them.

"What is or isn't wrong with TG" instead of "How we can fix what I think is wrong with TG".

If you disagree with something someone has identified as a problem, fine, you don't have to try to fix it. Wait for their proposed solution and comment on that instead.

If you want to solve problems you do believe have validity, offer up a suggestion and get feedback on your proposed solution. When there are actionable items, do it, or present it to the public, squad mates, admins, officers, moderators, contents developers, or even the big man hisself for consideration.

There are a lot of places to take good ideas.

__________________



| Wearing the TG tags | Reporting infractions | How to get started with PoE |

Magnum50

funny how so many people can take offense to one members thoughts and opinions, it's kinda like "I don't agree with you, so heres why you shouldn't be posting that." lol

It's not like I was referring to everyone at TG, it's not like I was referring to every IHS... my point about in house squads is that IMO, again I say it IMO, they should be for in-house competitions, or outside supported competitions that represent TG.

I am simply talking about a few experiences I had when playing games, on TG servers, that was dominated by IHS... I was left out of the plan, when I was remembered I was assigned some rear guard position, which I did...we always need rear guards, but then I was left when the rest of the INS moved out, never asked what my position was and if I had contact... I filmed this stuff with fraps, but choose NOT to put certain IHS or persons on the spot... Out of the 10 times I've played on a server with a IHS majority, this stuff happened 6 times... it happened, so I said it.

and for "cleaning up this thread", WHAT? what did I do wrong? was this not a open forum for comments after the "state of the Union" address? or was it only for people who are all cozy and happy with what is going on at TG?

and finally, Iamthe fallen, what the hell does your post mean? I post a opinion on what I see as the new direction and new membership of TG, and instead of that i should of recommended change or brought it up with someone else, what the hell?

again, funny how one persons opinion and comment can cause so many replies and counter comments... sounds like someone feeling either a little guilty because they know I'm right, or defensive because I don't see things as Rosie as some of you. lol

__________________
Magnum
www.gettacticaldammit.com

Atomic Dog

I don't think anyone's taking offense Mag, I'm certainly not. I stated my perspective on the issues you brought up simply because I just don't see it the way you do. Being that it's an open discussion...your comments are open to response as much as anyone else's. If you want discussion, be ready for response. If you're going to make statements that seem critical DEFINITELY be ready for a response and to defend your position on the matter. But it's bad form to get the ball rolling on something and then turn it around on the people who disagree with you by labeling them as "feeling a little guilty" or "defensive" simply because your sentiments are not shared by everyone.

__________________

Iamthefallen

First, you keep making comments and predictions on how others think, what their motivations might be, and what the result will be, it's not really constructive. Just stop please.

Secondly, basically my post boils down to this: You keep complaining, but you don't offer any suggestions. You almost seem offended that people responded to you, but you don't make any suggestions as to what you want the discussion to actually be about.

So, are you just venting, or are you trying to make things better? What are you hoping to accomplish here, in this particular thread?

__________________



| Wearing the TG tags | Reporting infractions | How to get started with PoE |

Magnum50

I was hoping to open eyes to what is going on, or at least perceived as going on... but the only responses have been denial.

Of course I wanted this discussed otherwise I would of never posted it... but like i said, if anyone ever post something negative, it's them venting or whinning... I got a couple of feedback remarks telling me that I'm the problem, just leave already, lol... why because i disagree and don't see it that way.

Most of the responses here rarely know me at all, because I don't play many of the newer "action" shooters, and thats fine, but to label me as a trouble maker because you don't like my post, lol...come on already.

As I said before, it was a state of the Union address, so as in all state of the unions I replied and stated my likes and dislikes, my beliefs and my vision... I'm not asking everyone to agree with me, just have a open mind, and think when new players, or old players, or non-IHS players join a server.

I'm not happy about the state of computer game lately, but I don't blame the membership... I blame the developers for making action shooters instead of tactical shooters...

the days seem gone both for PC gaming and here at TG of old school tactical shooters like GR, RS, OFP, SWAT... now it's Battlefield rip offs, and console remakes (which I play and enjoy, but there still not tactical in the sense that I know and love.)

Just look at the 2 forum catigoires... the only thing in the "Sim" forums that get any traffic is ArmA, which IMO has turned around here at TG and become a winner, I was a little worried about the state of ArmA at first. (and I did make