Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brunettes; The Superior Choice

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Brunettes; The Superior Choice





    THE SET UP


    Everyone wants to play with their bros. That's why they are bros. Everyone realizes this, and I hope we are all able to come to terms with the inevitability of it, so we can move forward. It is the how to go about moving forward where TG'rs begin to diverge.

    There are two camps. The first camp does not see a 'problem', and so doesn't think anything should be done about it. Some simply don't see "winning" or "competition" as being all that important in the TG experience. On the other extreme, some put a heavy importance on winning, and have found an easy way to do it. Most in this camp though, they are a lot like me in PR when I decide to drive anything with wheels; not much foresight, or ability to learn from past blunders.

    The second, much larger camp, believes something should be done to fix the 'problem'. Within this camp are a few who believe they can change the attitude entirely, making it known the practice is looked down upon, believing their opinions hold sway. Some consciously make an effort to counter-act whatever perceived effects this practice may have by pro-actively balancing when bros start to gather in large numbers. Most in this camp however are like my good buddy Alpha. They've had a hard day flipping tricks on the corner, and now they just want to crack a beer, roll a cigarette, and play some PR.






    THE FIX


    I observe people will play with their bros, this is how things are. I have come to terms with this reality. I contend that something should be done about this, because the costs of doing nothing outweigh the benefits of always playing with my bros. What, then, should be done? It's simple, and we can start tomorrow.
    • Stand up two TG Companies, each with a unique mix of In House Squads and TG Affiliated Squads.
    • Alpha company and Bravo Company squads are never to play on the same team during the short cycle.
    • Shuffle squads every couple three weeks.


    Who decides the squad distribution? I believe TG has a proper bunch of leaders who would be happy to make up a selection committee. Each cycle should have a sticky listing the squad distributions to each company for the term. At the end of each cycle, there should be a thread where TG members can comment on the performance of the Companies, and submit ideas for the next cycle.

    Just don't put Quu with the 69th first go around please, those guys are nubs.



    Stay together, communicate, don't give up.

    sigpic

  • #2
    Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

    I likey.

    Ive seen that last face before... its the "You just smashed, and your leaving already?" face.
    -oG.WarrioR-


    |?|

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

      First of all, I'd really appreciate if there weren't scantily clad women in the PR section of the site. Just like discussing drug and alcohol use, it doesn't really contribute. And while I may be attracted to the images you posted, I do have a problem with them being half naked. There are young adults on this website.

      Second of all, this is just another thread where people will accuse others of teamstacking.

      Instead of opening a thread using "vaugeurization" (a word I've made up and used) to try and avoid hurting other peoples feelings, you could organize a meeting of In House Squad leaders, External Clan leaders, and Server Admins, and discuss "the fix." Most of the IHS' have their leader's profiles linked on the IHS wiki. You can PM them there and set up a meeting using TS3. There is also a list of Admins, and you could PM them, too. At this meeting, you could talk about "the fix" and "bros" playing together.

      Now, pleasantries aside, the bottom line is this:

      I refuse to be told who I can and cannot play with on the server because it may be perceived to be "teamstacking." Jesus, the IHS' have been accused of this for over 3 years now and quite frankly I'm tired of it.

      Do we sometimes deserve criticisms? Yes.
      Do we deserve to be the scapegoat for an entire community's problem? No.

      I don't want players or admins saying "You cannot play with that guy because of the tags he wears."
      I don't want players or admins saying "Your IHS cannot play with that IHS because that's teamstacking."

      Please, for the love of God, TG, and PR, come and speak to IHS members DIRECTLY. I'm tired of the endless public threads where a lynch mob is formed.

      On a more positive note, I really enjoy playing with ? guys, and really value your presence on the server. Keep doing what you're doing. I don't want to be barred from playing with you guys simply because someone might think we're "teamstacking."
      Skud


      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

        Do we sometimes deserve criticisms? Yes.
        Do we deserve to be the scapegoat for an entire community's problem? No.
        IHSes are only targeted because they are the only tangible groups of players.
        If every player could be grouped based on certain characteristics (Good pilot, good tank crewman, etc) the community would suggest that an equal number of each group should be distributed between the teams.


        Before I had read Skud's post it made me think more of a competition-encouraging environment, where two IHSes would "face off" for the month. It's affect on "teamstacking" would be a secondary benefit.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

          I think TG leadership has a clear enough policy on this:

          http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...g-threads.html
          sigpic

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

            Originally posted by Celestial1 View Post
            Before I had read Skud's post it made me think more of a competition-encouraging environment, where two IHSes would "face off" for the month. It's affect on "teamstacking" would be a secondary benefit.
            This.

            I think this entire thread is just a friendly gesture to encourage more friendly rivalries between In-House Squads; similar to how the |TG-X| and the |TG-6th| used to switch to different teams on the server to face-off against each other. I do not believe this idea warrants contacting IHS leads directly as this is something that can be done on an individual basis, as they see fit.

            I have personally seen the |TG-69th| do this on several occasions recently, so kudos to them for their efforts.

            As far as the women in lingerie... please, it's no big deal.
            CR8Z: "No, I've not been good, but as an American, I'm entitled to everything I want."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

              Originally posted by Celestial1 View Post
              Before I had read Skud's post it made me think more of a competition-encouraging environment, where two IHSes would "face off" for the month. It's affect on "teamstacking" would be a secondary benefit.
              Going to have to agree.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                tl;dr

                just looked at the pictures.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                  "IHS's are only targeted because they are the only tangible groups of players."

                  Inexcuable, you cannot justify scapegoating one section of a community because you are unable or unwilling to explore and identify all the factors/individuals/groups involved.

                  Firstly, this isn't going to happen, period. The administration is not going to sit down and tell people who they can or can't play with. Why not, well for one we have enough to do without having to baby sit the entire player base in the apparent absence of personal responsibility or individual ethics. Furthermore it is not in line with how this community operates.

                  Why should we have to legislate yet further because people can't do the right thing? People complain about rules all the time, too complicated, unclear, "we're just having fun", etc. Why should the admins have to administer and monitor this?

                  Oh and FYI the 10th and the 6th still pretty much keep ourselves seperate. You may see a couple of us in the same squad every other week but that's about it. Funny how the same 2 IHS's get mentioned in every single one of these threads. Some of the other IHS log on with 8-10 players at a time, never see them mentioned.

                  Anther reason why this can't work, regardless, is this, THE ACTUAL REALITY OF WHY TEAMS GET IMBALANCED, individuals. It isn't anymore complicated then that.

                  People will log on and switch to the team they want, period. How am I able to predict this with any degree of certainty, because I sit watching CC and see it every time people log on. I catch a player I know always switches for whatever reason, jumping ship when there is already a numerical imbalance.
                  I put out a little warning in ADMIN text and move him back. 20 seconds later, he has suicided and tried again, despite the team imbalance (numerical). I issue another request that the switching stops and warn that I will remove people who sit idle trying to switch, it continues. Now repeat this scenario in your head ad infinitum. That is the root cause of team balance issues.

                  So let's say hypothetically we tried this logistical nightmare, what do you do when players don't want to play ball? How does this work, is it a gentlemen's agreement or do the admins have to enforce it? Do we kick people from the TG server because they are not playing in their arbitrarily assigned teams?!

                  What about the visitors to the server, other clans that like to play together, some of who apparently like to play on the team with the most TG tags on it. They are a factor in team balance, how does this system take those factors into account?

                  Here's a couple of idea's for trying to counter team balance problems, they have been suggested before but apparently forgotten:-

                  - Take personal responsibility for your actions, don't ask an admin to act as your conscience

                  - When you log on stay on the team you are assigned sometimes , not always, just sometimes and take a risk on meeting new people.

                  - Don't always switch to find leadership, to follow your favourite SL, take a deep breath and have a go a leading yourself

                  - Look at the teams, use your judgement, is one team struggling, could they use your help

                  - Don't log on and switch because you really want to leather the clearly weaker opponent and can't risk losing

                  - Don't log on and proclaim you are joining the team with the most 'mumblers' on, that is not something to be proud of

                  - If you are part of a clan, IHS, Group etc and you are joining the server in force, don't always switch to the team that already has a bunch of experienced players, this happens a lot and creates a really obvious imbalance

                  - When you log on the server, don't always think 'ME FIRST', don't always think about your own enjoyment first, the short term gratification. Perhaps consider that you may derive some gratification from meeting new people, helping the underdog, trying to SL a group of 5 new players for the first time.

                  None of these radical, off the way, crazy a#s suggestions require any administrative action. None of them require anyone to babysit players so that they do the right thing. None of them target any specific groups because they are too lazy to identify all the factors.

                  All of these suggestions are beautifully simple, elegant in design and low maintenance. I admit they require personal responsibility, an unselfish attitude, a willingness not to blame others etc. Perhaps this is why they seem hard for people to actually do.

                  Paine, I applaud your efforts, at the very least you are thinking and trying to address a situation that can negatively affect our server at times. I don't agree with your current suggestion but at least you are being pro-active.

                  To summarise, you cannot legislate a problem like this away, you cannot 'silver bullet' this as if it was some external problem that once solved will go away for ever. What you can do is take a long hard look at yourself as an individual and really ask yourself if you are doing all the little things that can be done. This truly boils down to individuals, it is caused by individual action, it can be solved by individual action.


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                    The balance issue on the server has come up more and more often of late; it seems to by cyclical, disappearing for a few months then raging again to the forefront for a while. We, the admins as well as the in-house leaders, are well aware of the issue. Actually, it was discussed at least twice yesterday by myself and some of my teammates. The last password event we ran had a password of 'balance', so you know it's an issue and we are trying to make everyone aware of it.

                    Let's do this:

                    First, let's not jump down anyone's throat for mentioning concerns about balance on the server, perceived or reality. I do not have a problem with Paine's post at all (commentary on the beauties later) and I don't think anyone else should. Actually, I'd like people to actually take a few minutes to think about what he's saying before they hit the 'reply' button and especially think about the times they've been on the server when there is a terrible balance issue in teamwork/names/mumble and have made the decision to switch to the stronger side or have ignored the pleas for help from the other team.

                    Secondly, and in the same vein as what I've just mentioned, can we maybe have a little bit more of a conscious effort to try to balance the rounds out by players other than IHS members? Sure, we should switch and we very - VERY - often do switch sides. However, what usually happens when we do that is that everyone else switches over as well, shifting the balance entirely from one side to the other instead of evening it out between the two sides. Please note: I do not expect players to switch in the middle of the round! Any attempts to address balance should be done in between rounds.

                    Thirdly, please understand that sometimes teams just lose and if you are on a losing team it's not a conspiracy that is being enacted against you by the other team. Think about why you're losing and don't focus on the number of players on both teams nor the names. Instead, what did your team fail to do that the other team did do right? Perhaps the map layout favored the other team dramatically. Perhaps the assets favored the other team. Perhaps your team failed to build a FOB in a critical location to hold a flag. Perhaps your team lacked a skilled transport pilot (it only takes 1 to make your team effective). There are a ton of reasons why teams lose games in this mod and you certainly cannot blame it all on the 32 people opposing you every single time.

                    Fourth, please understand the nature of Project Reality when combined with the nature of Tactical Gamer. The current incarnation of Project Reality is that is a very demanding and mentally draining game. Rounds last upwards of 2 hours on most AAS layouts and I've seen insurgency rounds last close to 3 hours before. That is one hell of a long time to get a single round in!! Guess what happens during those hours? People come and go. That nasty thing called 'real life' rears it's ugly head and people get called away by: work, girlfriends, wives, children, school, parents, etc. etc. etc. The player base during a normal round probably changes by at least 25%. Throw into that mix the Tactical Gamer supporting member kick and now you've got real turnover. It hasn't been unheard of for a team to be pushed back on it's heels only to mount an amazing comeback and I wouldn't be surprised if losing a few members on the winning team to real-life or the sm kick didn't have something to do with the rally from the opposing team. It's just the nature of things. Additionally, if you join a round in the middle, please don't make it your personal crusade to start complaining about the team balance. You don't know how things have gone for this round or rounds previously just by looking at the two rosters.

                    Now, with all of that said, I kind of like Paine's idea about 'company' battles. The most logical way to try to implement this idea would be with password nights, but over the course of a couple of weeks as sort of an extended "Pick 'em" night. We'll look into that.

                    Lastly, with regard to the ladies in this post, I have to agree that they are not necessarily PR-related. However, there's no nudity involved so I don't see how they violate the usage policy of the forums, and they do get your attention. Most importantly, I like how Paine used them to help make his points in his post, so as far as I'm concerned they can stay.

                    Last lastly: Think about your responses before you hit 'reply'. Maybe you shouldn't even hit 'reply' but instead think about what is really important here: winning, or enjoying a good game against quality competition?

                    "You milsim guys are ruining the game."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                      Originally posted by A.WICKENS View Post
                      "IHS's are only targeted because they are the only tangible groups of players."

                      Inexcuable, you cannot justify scapegoating one section of a community because you are unable or unwilling to explore and identify all the factors/individuals/groups involved.
                      Agree. Not that an example is needed, but last night a large number of TG regulars, some IHS members, some non, had a seperate TS3 channel setup for their 'pnwery' since all of them were on the same team. Most of these 10-14 players entered scores of 2000+ if not 1100+ point range by end of round. Quite a few of them had kills above 20+. Total points for their team ranged 35k by end of round while the opfor ranged 11k. Both conventional factions so opportunity to score high was there for both. Yet even the single highest scoring opfor player only managed to pull in approx. 1000 points by end of round. Strange.
                      Regardless of the end game score being 71-0, a relatively close match, the opfor team was barely clinging on the entire match with only a handful of a willing leaders to SL for the team.

                      LEADERSHIP is something not everyone has. It's unfortunate when those that have it, squander it to play together in such excessive numbers so very frequently as of late.

                      And don't think about hitting that 'J' key and mentioning 'boys club'. They don't, as paine mentioned, see anything wrong with it cause it was a 'close match'. Rubbish..

                      Quality of play matters moreso than winning, points and pwning. MW2 and CS:Source are great places to do that stuff.. leave PR out of it.

                      Here's a couple of idea's for trying to counter team balance problems, they have been suggested before but apparently forgotten:-

                      - Take personal responsibility for your actions, don't ask an admin to act as your conscience

                      - When you log on stay on the team you are assigned sometimes , not always, just sometimes and take a risk on meeting new people.

                      - Don't always switch to find leadership, to follow your favourite SL, take a deep breath and have a go a leading yourself

                      - Look at the teams, use your judgement, is one team struggling, could they use your help

                      - Don't log on and switch because you really want to leather the clearly weaker opponent and can't risk losing

                      - Don't log on and proclaim you are joining the team with the most 'mumblers' on, that is not something to be proud of

                      - If you are part of a clan, IHS, Group etc and you are joining the server in force, don't always switch to the team that already has a bunch of experienced players, this happens a lot and creates a really obvious imbalance

                      - When you log on the server, don't always think 'ME FIRST', don't always think about your own enjoyment first, the short term gratification. Perhaps consider that you may derive some gratification from meeting new people, helping the underdog, trying to SL a group of 5 new players for the first time.
                      Briiliantly simple points.

                      Server balancing is something that is always going to get a little upset every now and then and THAT is understandable. Like the rising and falling of the tide, player log ins, server kicks and all will create swells of imbalance.

                      But premeditated organizing a team of nearly 15 regulars to switch and join the same side. Pathetic and discouraging to the whole system.

                      B

                      The 189th Infantry Brigade: Taking the 'the' out of psychotherapist since 2010.

                      XFire: mrthomasking

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                        here's a thought...since the server is full every time i try to log in, disconnect if you are not having a good time. i will gladly play on the losing side just to get some games in.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                          Lol I did not even pay attention to the letters, words and most probably the sentences they form. I guess more people should react to the pictures, because lets face it, they are far more interesting!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                            Lots of IHS members switch I think, it's just that they do it in their own time or when somebody in their IHS tells them to move off to the other side to help them. That takes a bit.

                            One thing that I'd want to know is that: Is team-stacking measurable?

                            Can you lose with the enemy having 300 tickets and is that team-stacking? If you lose by 50 tickets is that not team-stacking? Or is it more of a gameplay satisfaction issue in that public people wont have as much fun and may not feel welcomed as much.

                            Pictures, well I'm 15. I sound mature on this but... never mind. :)

                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Brunettes; The Superior Choice

                              I hate it when something like this comes up in the forums and the venerable trio of dispo, skud and wickens beat me to the verbal punch. Well said gents.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X