What would you do to make WAR better?

[Bulbasaur]

First off, let me explain WAR. The concept isn't too complicated; forum members create teams/join their teams, and these teams compete in different categories. Here is a list of categories from the first PXR WAR.

WAR has been a tradition of PXR/PE2K for a while now. I remember joining my first WAR in around 2009. It was a great experience, and I really enjoyed it!

However, it seems WAR has not been as big a hit on PXR. I heard many a person express concerns about WAR II. This were valid concerns; for example, the teams being unfairly sized.

So my question to you all is: What were your biggest problems with WAR? And what would you do to change them? I really feel like with some brainstorming, we can solve the problems that people have had with WAR in the past!

Now, I'm just going to throw out possible ideas. I am not saying this ideas will be good, but they're ideas.

- A team size limit. Self explanatory, but basically says a team can not go over a certain number of members.
- Pre-determined teams. Basically, a few admins/moderators own a few teams. The reason I think this will work is because I always thought there was a bit a favoritism; for example, members not as well known throughout the whole forum would not be able to get a sufficient amount of members on their team.
- Shorter time period. Four weeks seems to be a common idea.
- Drafting members.
- Rewarding for a wider range of people.
- More awards per category.
- A set number of teams.

I'll edit this as people post ideas!

[Suicune's Fire]

Good thinking bringing it up, Eric! I feel like five weeks did make it drag on quite a bit...maybe four weeks would be better. xD (Or wait...was it five weeks? Maybe it was four but it felt like five.) After thinking about it, I wouldn't mind being allocated a team. It'd make things a lot easier. Maybe the team members could be drafted from date A to date B and THEN teams get made based on what the group members collectively think will work? That way, the people how get in early will have a say. Then if people join later, they'll just have to put up with being put with a pre-made team, haha. We could always start with team leaders, so that each team is ensured to have a team leader.

[Noblejanobii]

I think my main issue with WAR was that I felt like I wasn't contributing whenever I failed at the few categories I could participate in (spriting and writing). And I felt excluded from a majority of the events because I couldn't participate in ones like URPG because I wasn't really sure what to do. I wanted to participate in the roleplaying one but it felt waaaaay too mechanically and then after the first week of spriting I couldn't participate because I can't do scratch work. Then when I failed to place in all but one of the writing weeks, I felt like I wasn't really doing anything for my team.

So I think the main issue was that I felt the categories are a bit too exclusive. I had only been a member for half a year by the time I encountered WAR II. I didn't even know Xanthe or Neo all that well yet (or anyone for that matter), so I wanted to impress people and when I felt like I couldn't participate in all but one section, it was extremely disheartening. I got an award but I'm pretty sure Sarah gave it to me out of pity because I was so upset.

[Rival Max]

WAR came with a lot of drama. A LOT of drama. It was a like a title wave sucking up all the water. Afterwords there wasnt much left.

We discussed many of the things you brought. All of which were valid points. However team size and picking teams never went over well. An event like WAR was good in the old days however the forum activity being what it is, the newer style of event is perfect for the community size.

[Nekomata]

I'll post a link to my ideas for war from way back when. I spend a lot of time putting thoughts together for this only to have the thread locked shortly after, but whatever.

http://www.pokemoncrossroads.com/for...cussion/page34

Should be the second post on that page. My idea was to make WAR more rewarding for all participants and not just the highest scoring of each section. In other words, even if you didn't win, you could still get points for your team by participating. Other ideas would include awards per category in addition to overall winner. A team can not win the whole thing but still get an award for being the best in, say, spriting.

I honestly think WAR had potential, it was just run pretty badly. Whether or not it'll continue? No idea. I personally had no interest in the event that replaced it. Granted, I backed out of WAR due to frustrations/life after the first round.

[Pokemon Trainer Sarah]

Oh god, reading that thread back already makes me want to run for the hills. o_o That was like my lowest point ever on this forum. xD I don't think I could deal with that again haha.

It has always amused me that most of the people who had a real issue with it weren't active members and didn't come and participate in the stuff we did this year xD *runs*

[Nekomata]

Oh god, reading that thread back already makes me want to run for the hills. o_o That was like my lowest point ever on this forum. xD I don't think I could deal with that again haha.

It has always amused me that most of the people who had a real issue with it weren't active members and didn't come and participate in the stuff we did this year xD *runs*

Hah, I still harbor some annoyances over War II, but nothing particularly strong. I participated a bit, but stopped because well, it felt futile for someone like me to participate. Hard to get the motivation to join when you're crappy at every section and know that your chances of winning and getting ANY points for your team were basically nil. I think that was one of the big problems: only the winners of each section got points which put off people who didn't think they could win. It was rewarding to the winners, not the participants.

I did like the concept of it though and would have loved to see it improved to make it more rewarding for everyone- that's why I put the time into ideas for improving it. Shame nothing came out of that. xD I didn't do the stuff that we did this (last?) year cause it really didn't interest me all that much.

[Neo Emolga]

I would say...

• Team size balance. All teams will generally have the same number of players.
• Set number of teams. Perhaps six?
• Members are drafted first. Once initial draft is complete, then the team theme is discussed and decided on so everyone gets a chance to have a say in it and come to an agreement upon something generally everyone in the group likes.
• 4 Week duration. I find this has worked out the best and balances it between having enough to enjoy but not run too long until it becomes bland.
• 100 points per section per week. Judge allocates points based on quality percentage, but every entry gets at least 1 point (1 would mean it's really terrible quality, but at least something was done). A lot of entries means points will be thinned out among all of them, but a few entries means there's likely more points that will be awarded to those few participants.

That's the best I can come up with. It bears in mind Neko's idea where participants at least get something for their efforts, but still judges based primarily on quality.

[Rival Max]

WAR was stopped for a reason. It had a negative impact on the forum.
There are always other team based mini events that could work. In its place.

[Soups]

I would say...

• Team size balance. All teams will generally have the same number of players.
• Set number of teams. Perhaps six?
• Members are drafted first. Once initial draft is complete, then the team theme is discussed and decided on so everyone gets a chance to have a say in it and come to an agreement upon something generally everyone in the group likes.
• 4 Week duration. I find this has worked out the best and balances it between having enough to enjoy but not run too long until it becomes bland.
• 100 points per section per week. Judge allocates points based on quality percentage, but every entry gets at least 1 point (1 would mean it's really terrible quality, but at least something was done). A lot of entries means points will be thinned out among all of them, but a few entries means there's likely more points that will be awarded to those few participants.

That's the best I can come up with. It bears in mind Neko's idea where participants at least get something for their efforts, but still judges based primarily on quality.

I agree.

While our community here on PXR is growing, it's still relatively small. It would simply be best if there was a team limit. How many? That could be determined by committee, but I'd say no more than four or five teams. Also, I agree with Bulbasaur on the notion that teams should be created by members in position, namely admins/moderators.

There should be a draft. It's good for balance, fairness, and leaves room for members to step out of their comfort zone and meet/work with new members.

Due to the pace that we move at here on PXR (it's very relaxed and we each move at our own pace, which is awesome), it should be no longer than a month.

Also, it would be wise to get an understanding of which areas we feel would actually garner enough activity. It wouldn't make sense to have a competition in an area that nobody would particularly participate in.