WAR SEASON II: Discussion

[bronislav84]

It really should do that again. Like 75% of people drop out of RP once points end, prompting it's quick death immediately or leaving others hanging, then prompting it's slow death as people realize they're stuck.

[Neo Emolga]

It really should do that again. Like 75% of people drop out of RP once points end, prompting it's quick death immediately or leaving others hanging, then prompting it's slow death as people realize they're stuck.

I honestly think what causes WAR RP activity to dip the most is people dropping out mid-way because they got left behind or didn't feel like they could work around other RPers who post more. I think the one post per two days rule should make it easier for everyone to keep up with it and thus, be motivated to stay in the game. A solid RP with ongoing activity will last long after even the WAR concludes.

[Aberforth]

I honestly think what causes WAR RP activity to dip the most is people dropping out mid-way because they got left behind or didn't feel like they could work around other RPers who post more. I think the one post per two days rule should make it easier for everyone to keep up with it and thus, be motivated to stay in the game. A solid RP with ongoing activity will last long after even the WAR concludes.

Why not just making a certain order in which the RPers have to post? And possibly having a clause stating that if you don't post for 12 hours when it is your turn then you will be skipped.

[bronislav84]

You mean we're going to be keeping that rule after the points portion concludes? We're still gonna have people dropping when there's no points being given out anymore, and that could lead to very few posts so that those left will probably be able to keep up with a post whenever schedule.

I thought it was so everyone has a chance at points.

And that's not how most RPs work, Pyr. A turn order is only needed in direct player versus player so people can have a chance to react without being clobbered. Also 12 hours is too short. I personally sleep for 12 out of every 24.

[Lord Celebi]

Why not just making a certain order in which the RPers have to post? And possibly having a clause stating that if you don't post for 12 hours when it is your turn then you will be skipped.

Because RPs thrive on creativity and a general lack of restrictiveness, at least in my experience.

[Neo Emolga]

Why not just making a certain order in which the RPers have to post? And possibly having a clause stating that if you don't post for 12 hours when it is your turn then you will be skipped.

Nah, that would cause a pretty rough bottleneck, and a lot of "okay, who's up next" tracking that would slow things down. Plus imagine if 20 RPers join, and you post. You could potentially have to wait 12 hours x 19 people = 228 hours, which translates into 9.5 days before you could post again!

I think a "one post per two days" rule works just fine. It gives everyone else enough time to read up and write reactions.

You mean we're going to be keeping that rule after the points portion concludes? We're still gonna have people dropping when there's no points being given out anymore, and that could lead to very few posts so that those left will probably be able to keep up with a post whenever schedule.

I thought it was so everyone has a chance at points.

That too, but yeah, every method has it's pros and cons. We're just rolling with what we think will generate more positive results than negative ones.

[bronislav84]

I agree with Neo. Turns would be nuts, but we might drop the delay after points end to keep the flow. We'll see I guess.

For the delay thing, people will be on an honor system though. I'm not going to be reading too much into timestamps and it's just going to be in the rules to keep track of your own "when can I post again" time.

[Saraibre Ryu]

In terms of posting order vs not posting order, posting order works well in much smaller, close knit groups as opposed to larger ones. That happened to one of my RP's by accident and it kept it alive for two years. For WAR, probably not the best idea. If it boiled down to maybe four or five people then that'd be different.

[Ash K.]

I'd like to reply to this from the Phoenix Battalion thread without intruding in their thread and addressing a general concern I've had this year, so I think it's best posted here.

So I've been talking to a few other people on Skype, and I came up with an idea:

I'm proposing a merge with Team Awesome. Right now, we're looking at this:

Team Trainer - 20
The Prism League - 16
The Phoenix Battalion - 9
Team Awesome - 7
Team Magma - 5

Team Trainer and The Prism League both have a big lead up on both of our teams in terms of member count and power. However, if both Phoenix and Awesome were to merge, the gap would be closed in significantly and all of us would stand a much better chance at winning the WAR. Plus, both of our teams have strong common interests in things like graphic art and RP, so there's a strong synergy there and I definitely think we would work well together as a united team. Plus I honestly think this would be a great opportunity for all of us to have a better chance at winning the WAR.

So far, I've talked to Sabi, Bron, and XaiakuX himself, and everyone seems to like the idea.

We haven't worked out the exact details yet, but I would like to hear everyone's thoughts and ideas on this first. I will definitely take everyone's opinions and thoughts into account.

I'm sorry, but it seems a little unfair to just be closing the member gap between PB/Awesome and Trainer/Prism by leaving Magma, JMC, and Yoga Bears way behind. Honestly, the way the big teams keep getting bigger while the small ones struggle to barely make minimum requirement has been a large frustration of this year's WAR. Since the scoring system isn't scaled based on team size (which also has its advantages, primarily not making people feel like they're forced to do anything or are hurting the team), the smaller teams are left at a huge disadvantage right from the start. Having 5 people score as much as 20 is pretty much asking every member to doing be four times as much as they should have to. While I agree with not imposing an absolute limit on the teams, something may need to be done to fix this. One possible way is to impose a relative limit, saying that the difference between the minimum and maximum team sizes can't exceed a certain amount. While that cap is already met, members can't join a team of maximum size until the minimum size increases. Like any solution, it has faults and perhaps there is a better one, but none comes to mind at the time of posting this.

(also, before anyone tells me "if this is how I feel I shouldn't have made another team", please be aware HKim spent days talking me into it. Also, the fewer teams we have, the less it really feels like WAR. Two or three giant teams fighting it out is nowhere near as exciting as seven teams battling all across the forums.)

[Lord Celebi]

I'd like to reply to this from the Phoenix Battalion thread without intruding in their thread and addressing a general concern I've had this year, so I think it's best posted here.



I'm sorry, but it seems a little unfair to just be closing the member gap between PB/Awesome and Trainer/Prism by leaving Magma, JMC, and Yoga Bears way behind. Honestly, the way the big teams keep getting bigger while the small ones struggle to barely make minimum requirement has been a large frustration of this year's WAR. Since the scoring system isn't scaled based on team size (which also has its advantages, primarily not making people feel like they're forced to do anything or are hurting the team), the smaller teams are left at a huge disadvantage right from the start. Having 5 people score as much as 20 is pretty much asking every member to doing be four times as much as they should have to. While I agree with not imposing an absolute limit on the teams, something may need to be done to fix this. One possible way is to impose a relative limit, saying that the difference between the minimum and maximum team sizes can't exceed a certain amount. While that cap is already met, members can't join a team of maximum size until the minimum size increases. Like any solution, it has faults and perhaps there is a better one, but none comes to mind at the time of posting this.

(also, before anyone tells me "if this is how I feel I shouldn't have made another team", please be aware HKim spent days talking me into it. Also, the fewer teams we have, the less it really feels like WAR. Two or three giant teams fighting it out is nowhere near as exciting as seven teams battling all across the forums.)

The WAR Leaders will discuss this and return with an answer.