Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Gentlemans' Tournament

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Gentlemans' Tournament

    This discussion is only allowed to continue on one premise: No debate about teamstacking. Not even slightly.
    Do not mention it, and ignore posts that mention it entirely.
    Don't make me regret asking Dispo for this discussion to have a second chance only for this to turn into exactly what we are trying to avoid.


    I asked him to reopen the thread so that we could further discuss the idea of some form of a "Gentleman's Agreement" where we would, of our own decision, attempt to be on the opposite team of our pre-chosen enemy for some amount of time. No one shall be barred from playing on any team by anyone, admins included. You can choose not to agree, and you can choose to break your agreement at any time. You are not bound in any way to compete.

    The reason I wish to discuss this is twofold:
    1) I believe that Paine's post was overshadowed by his attempts to spice it up with the hotties and his attempt to appeal to some with the perceived benefit teamstacking; I think that perhaps with a fresh start we could attempt to discuss the idea itself rather than the supporting material.
    2) I believe that the idea has the possibility to bring in some fun, competitive spirit to the server, and also encourage more effort by players employed to present a challenge–keeping the level of teamwork on the server up to awe-inspiring levels even off of PW Nights.


    I ask that anyone replying keep their post simple and to the point–this will help to get a general assessment of who is in favor/who is against the idea, and to help reduce the possibility of someone bringing up teamstacking and the thread veering off from there.

    I ask for a few things in your post (in no particular order; do so as you see fit):
    1) Approval/Unsure/Disapproval of the idea (under any circumstances you so choose ie. Approval but only on PW nights), with reasoning.
    2) If in approval, when would you want to see this competition (PW Nights? During all regular public play?) and how long would you like each "session" to last (a week? a month?); or whatever idea you have in mind as to how this would be done.
    3) Politeness. Please do not target another forum member for their decision on the matter, and please allow your comments to be mindful of those with a different opinion; no exceptions.

    About the "Tournament"
    I'd like to make it clear that the "tournament" is:
    1) Not an actual tournament. (There will not be a system where a "winner" passes on–everyone will get to play, always)
    2) Completely voluntary. (No admins should act upon any player not upholding a part of the agreement–it is the player's choice; a player can choose to exit the agreement at any moment they choose, and reenter at any time, if they are part of a currently participating team)
    3) Not restricted to IHSes. (I'll explain it better when I think of a good system, but teams will be made up by the participants–an entire IHS can sign up, if they all agree and they can all be put in a team or teams with one another; an unaffiliated player can sign up alone, and will be paired up in any open spots. For anywhere I may refer to "IHS" as a team within the tournament, previously or henceforth, feel free to assume that it is just a group of players participating, not just those who are in the IHS)



    Reply with your stances and thoughts on the idea. Please, do not mention teamstacking, and do not derail the thread with comments about the original thread or any posts previous to this one; pm Paine if you want more brunettes. Keep the debate civil and thoughtful.




    FAQ:

    What if two IHSes that are competing both have an agreement to be on the separate team of a third IHS that joins the game?
    IHSes will be randomly assigned opponents as part of the Gentlemans' Agreement; They will not select their own, so the matchups would be decided in such a way that avoids these situations.

    What sort of competition are you talking about?
    Your choice. It can be done on a skirmish map where the two fight off alone, or it can be that they separate during all public play. Please provide reasoning for your choice.

    This seems like a lot of effort for admins...
    It's called a Gentlemans' Tournament in spirit of the good ol' Gentlemans' Agreement; no admins will be involved in the slightest–participation in the "Tournament" is completely voluntary and you can break out of the Agreement at any time you wish.
    Last edited by Celestial1; 08-23-2010, 08:44 PM.

  • #2
    Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

    Unsure. Here is a a hypothetical.
    Be sure to consider that if for example the 6th agree to play against the 189th that no hangups occur with other accords.
    Ie: The 189th and 6th seperately also agree that they cannot play against the 15th. Creating a grey area.

    Perhaps IHS's can only have one accord with one other IHS at a time?
    That would help simplify things. Until server populations created congestion.

    Nice revival.

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

    XFire: mrthomasking

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

      what sort of competition are you talking about? like skirmish map squad vs squad?

      or are you just trying to get the IHS on different sides to try to even up the server?

      either way sounds good to me. the only down side is some people think PR is serious business and will get pissy when things dont go their way.

      "All of you stay frickin high speed. All you stay on your frickin primaries and frickin slay bodies all day long. Good to go" -Combat Ninja lol

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

        I always wanted to be an officer AND a gentlemen so I heartily support any increase in organized competition in any form.
        You have to be trusted by the people that you lie to,
        So that when they turn their backs on you,
        You'll get the chance to put the knife in.Pink Floyd "Dogs"

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

          Originally posted by TomKing View Post
          Ie: The 189th and 6th seperately also agree that they cannot play against the 15th. Creating a grey area.
          IHSes would be randomly assigned an opponent as part of the gentlemans' agreement; they would not choose their own opponent (The "Gentlemans' Agreement" would consist more of "I agree to follow the rules set here... I agree to play against the assigned team for the time period set"), so there would be no conflicts.

          Feel free to repost if you have change your mind, that goes for everyone. :)

          Originally posted by ankyle62 View Post
          what sort of competition are you talking about? like skirmish map squad vs squad?

          or are you just trying to get the IHS on different sides to try to even up the server?
          #2 of the requested information for replies in OP attempts to allow you to choose what you think would be best.

          My ideal? During all public play, the involved IHSes would be on separate teams.
          But it could be a PW night event where the game is otherwise normal, (62 players etc) but those involved are separated...
          or a PW night event where they face off individually on a skirmish...
          Or anything else you can think of. Just make sure to include reasoning why you choose what you do (remember though, nothing about teamstacking). :)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

            Disapprove.

            Originally posted by Celestial1 View Post
            Reply with your stances and thoughts on the idea.. Keep the debate civil and thoughtful.
            It's my belief the IHS members should be able to play on whatever side they choose. I'm afraid of the logistical nightmare it may cause, or pull other IHS into something they never agreed to. Example:
            IHS A and B have an agreement to face off
            IHS A has 4 people on the server
            IHS B has 1 person
            IHS C has 3 people, but was already on the same side as IHS A. They do not have an agreement with either A or B. Are they *wink wink, *nudge nudged into switching sides to balance? Why should they have to? If they don't switch, what has been gained by the first agreement? I guess you can swap A and B, but now you are moving 5 people around, what happens on a 31v31 server pop? Now random people are force switched? See how this spirals?

            I just see this not working well on a day to day basis. I wont disagree that an organized event would work fine, but in organized events, generally team balance is not an issue.

            Originally posted by Apophis in TG Primer
            2) Create an environment where there was mutual respect for your fellow gamers and where all members would be working together to advance the enjoyment of their hobby.
            To add, should there have to be 'agreements' just to create a balance? Whatever happened to doing it because it seemed like a good idea? We aren't creating any new behaviors with this approach, we are enacting rules. I think what you want to achieve here is a behavior shift, not a conditional 'agreement'.
            Q: How many members of Congress does it take to change a light bulb?
            A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its conditions are improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are delusional spin from the liberal media. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?!?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

              Originally posted by ThirdSin View Post
              It's my belief the IHS members should be able to play on whatever side they choose.
              And they can. Participation in the "Tournament" is completely voluntary, and any individual may decide to end their agreement at any time (and join back into it at any time, if they are in the middle of participation)–No one's forced to do anything.

              I'm afraid of the logistical nightmare it may cause, or pull other IHS into something they never agreed to. Example:
              IHS A and B have an agreement to face off
              IHS A has 4 people on the server
              IHS B has 1 person
              IHS C has 3 people, but was already on the same side as IHS A. They do not have an agreement with either A or B. Are they *wink wink, *nudge nudged into switching sides to balance? Why should they have to? If they don't switch, what has been gained by the first agreement? I guess you can swap A and B, but now you are moving 5 people around, what happens on a 31v31 server pop? Now random people are force switched? See how this spirals?
              I thank you for bringing up scenarios in which the system might fail, for they would certainly help to make it less vulnerable of a system.
              If this were to happen under any circumstances, I would recommend that C completely ignores them and mentions that they aren't involved–if on public play, it wouldn't matter that B has less players, as that player of B still has 29 other players to work with. And if that player of B feels that it's just too much too handle, nothing is preventing him from switching to the side with team A until he gets some of his teammates with him to make it more bearable.

              To add, should there have to be 'agreements' just to create a balance? Whatever happened to doing it because it seemed like a good idea? We aren't creating any new behaviors with this approach, we are enacting rules. I think what you want to achieve here is a behavior shift, not a conditional 'agreement'.
              "Balance" is to this thread what "Teamstacking" is to this thread.
              I'm not looking to discuss any affect on teamstacking, good bad or otherwise. If you think that I'm doing this because of "teamstacking", I'm sorry to say you're mistaken. :)





              I'd like to make it clear that the "tournament" is:
              1) Not an actual tournament. (There will not be a system where a "winner" passes on–everyone will get to play, always)
              2) Completely voluntary. (No admins should act upon any player not upholding a part of the agreement–it is the player's choice)
              3) Not restricted to IHSes. (I'll explain it better when I think of a good system, but teams will be made up by the participants–an entire IHS can sign up, if they all agree and they can all be put in a team or teams with one another; an unaffiliated player can sign up alone, and will be paired up in any open spots. For anywhere I may refer to "IHS" as a team within the tournament, previously or henceforth, feel free to assume that it is just a group of players participating)

              I'll be adding anything that needs to be clarified either to the post itself or to the FAQ in the original post.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                Originally posted by Celestial1 View Post
                "Balance" is to this thread what "Teamstacking" is to this thread.
                I'm not looking to discuss any affect on teamstacking, good bad or otherwise. If you think that I'm doing this because of "teamstacking", I'm sorry to say you're mistaken. :)
                Of course that wasn't my intent. But I think you dodge my point. My argument here is that a system will change nothing, its learned behavior that should be changed. I could, but I wont go into detail, just fill in what you've read in other posts about not locking squads, teaching new people, that sort of thing. No one should be incentivized to do anything, they can elect do it because they like the community they involve themselves in and want to see it grow. Help the community help itself, i say.

                At Dispo's recommendation in the original post, i went back and read *most* of the other TS threads (some of those things are many many pages). After reading them, i'm still convinced individuals have to want this to happen. Some individuals are going to have to be pioneers and leaders, if not for themselves then for their community. Unless this happens, I don't see much hope for real permanent change. Again, such is life.
                (btw Dispo, what was with including the 4/1 joke thread? Comic relief? Having been here a short while, i was also intially confused. Got me too i guess!)

                For the lazy ones:

                Celestial I agree with what you're trying to accomplish, I just see it as a temporary action without permanence. Maybe you should go write the next stimulus bill for the US economy or something ;-)
                Q: How many members of Congress does it take to change a light bulb?
                A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its conditions are improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are delusional spin from the liberal media. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?!?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                  I copied and pasted part of what I wrote in the other thread below cause I'm too lazy to type it again.....

                  A little twist on Paine's original idea inspired by one of my favorite acronyms and in honor of the ladies present, KISS (Keep It Simple stupid).

                  Rather than have 2 companies that are fixed for a certain period of time maybe have regularly scheduled pickem nights, weekly bi-weekly etc..., choose 2 commanders but rather than pick individuals divide up by IHS' and clans 1st then choose any unaffiliated players. Play the round or rounds. After the round or rounds are over each IHS and/or clan on the winning team would get so many points and the IHS' and/or clans on the losing team would also earn points only fewer. At the end of the month the IHS or clan with the most points wins. Then we could do it all over again each month and turn it into kind of a roving trophy. Might be fun to see who can hang on to it the longest.

                  Anyway this is a rough idea but below are some of the things I was thinking about as I was forming this idea:

                  *Pickem format doesnt require a bunch of preplanning
                  *Point system would encourage participation, win or lose you still earn something.
                  *Awarding points to the IHS or clan and not individuals wouldnt favor the largers squads/clans
                  *More good old fasioned friendly competition
                  *Results easily tracked

                  One thing I'm not sure about is how to include the unaffiliated players.

                  I for one would like to see something like this tried. What do yall think?


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                    Originally posted by ThirdSin View Post
                    Celestial I agree with what you're trying to accomplish, I just see it as a temporary action without permanence. Maybe you should go write the next stimulus bill for the US economy or something ;-)
                    No, I don't think you understand Third. It has absolutely, positively, nothing whatsoever to do with teamstacking.
                    What it does have to do with is that I believe it will be fun competition, bring some attention to the server, and encourage PW-Night level play all the time.

                    If I wanted to discuss "ways to fix teamstacking", this wouldn't be mentioned.
                    Keep that discussion out of this thread, please.


                    Originally posted by Wookie View Post
                    Rather than have 2 companies that are fixed for a certain period of time maybe have regularly scheduled pickem nights, weekly bi-weekly etc..., choose 2 commanders but rather than pick individuals divide up by IHS' and clans 1st then choose any unaffiliated players. Play the round or rounds. After the round or rounds are over each IHS and/or clan on the winning team would get so many points and the IHS' and/or clans on the losing team would also earn points only fewer. At the end of the month the IHS or clan with the most points wins. Then we could do it all over again each month and turn it into kind of a roving trophy. Might be fun to see who can hang on to it the longest.
                    The only big problem I see off-hand is that you wouldn't want IHSes/Clans being picked first because it leaves those who are unaffiliated (for whatever reason) will be last picked, inevitably leading to players being left out because they're unaffiliated. (One way to avoid this would to be to group IHSes as a "player" where if you pick an IHS, you get all of their members, then the opposing commander would pick enough to meet that, etc. The picking process could get hairy!)

                    Other than that, not a bad idea at all.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                      Not to rain on a good idea, and I think all teamwork related ideas are great.

                      From my experience, just doing a scrim is difficult with weeks of advance notice. I think anything "organized" will also require at least some admin support, so that would have to be supportable from the admin team; i.e. map selection / changing, restarting / passwording the server, etc. I feel that if it is done in the public / open server (unpassworded) it will fail.

                      I would very much support more events, password nights / theme nights, scrims, even multi-round tournaments. I feel those would have the level of organization required to achieve your goals and desires within the constraints of the reality required to pull it off.

                      So, my position is: Do this type of thing in closed, semi-organized events; have more of them than we do have now (and thanks to the new admins for organizing more events); change the theme each time - IHSs vs IHSs with community help, skirmish, insurgent, vehicle, AAS big maps.

                      Thanks folks for keeping this thread professional. I appreciate it.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                        Originally posted by O=T-M-A-N=O View Post
                        From my experience, just doing a scrim is difficult with weeks of advance notice. I think anything "organized" will also require at least some admin support, so that would have to be supportable from the admin team; i.e. map selection / changing, restarting / passwording the server, etc.
                        Well, certainly. I sure don't have access to server controls; if it were scrim-style, then yes, it would need admin support in regards to setting up the server for use. (But I, or whoever would be handling the event, would take care of the details).
                        But admins would not be necessary to enforce the rules of the agreement since it is completely voluntary.

                        I feel that if it is done in the public / open server (unpassworded) it will fail.
                        Care to elaborate on why you think it would fail?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                          Failure
                          So what ?
                          If you fail, then identify the cause and try again.
                          You have to be trusted by the people that you lie to,
                          So that when they turn their backs on you,
                          You'll get the chance to put the knife in.Pink Floyd "Dogs"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                            Originally posted by CallousDisregard View Post
                            Failure
                            So what ?
                            If you fail, then identify the cause and try again.
                            We're in the "Preemptive Failing" phase right now. :P

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: A Gentlemans' Tournament

                              Care to elaborate on why you think it would fail?
                              Sure.

                              I think the randomness of it in the public / non-event mode would be unsupportable long term due to people's human nature to just get on the server and play. The server population would also generally be oblivious to the situation you are trying to create. Some players will always want to be USA or Insurgent, so on. Groups aren't always on at the same time, so participation would be spotty at best.

                              Organized events wouldn't have these issues.

                              Just my thoughts on it.
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X