Jump to content
Thawk

[Discussion] ARMA Barrier to Entry Concept

Recommended Posts

United Operations ARMA Barrier to Entry Concept

Aim: To create the smallest barrier of entry possible to UO in an attempt to improve overall standard of play, as well as minimising overall admin load.

 

Objective 1: Develop a Basic Soldiering Skills course

Objective 2: Modify charter to allow implementation of concept

Objective 3: Physical modifications of primary and TS as well as briefing to Regulars.

 

This concept is being put forward in an attempt to solve the degrading play of the primary server whilst minimizing the bureaucratic effort of Officers and UOTC Instructors. This short document has been prepared and reviewed by many of the key players here at UO. Readers have the ability to place small comment on portions and I can provide a reply to them personally. Otherwise, you can reply more comprehensively here.

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QIlGfn8wc2w2fKrXddFYq1k4tcLiuLzIUZwdnmGy55M/edit?usp=sharing

Share this post


Link to post

Agree, this should straighten out the primary and teach players the basic skills to function on UO

Share this post


Link to post

Great write up, Thawk. I was honestly surprised when joining UO because this concept is employed by a ton of gaming communities. I feel that it will take some getting used to, but in the end will benefit us all.

Edited by The BrentP

Share this post


Link to post

Read the document and if I could vote, it would be a most enthusiastic yes. I think it is a fantastic self-regulating way of improving the play on the primary in the shortest and most painless way possible. Most excellent idea; like you say, the barrier of entry is small enough to eliminate derping but not deter those who are seriously looking for a milsim community such as ours.

Share this post


Link to post

Thawk had presented this to me in the past and I most certainly agree with the concept. I think with proper implementation, we should be able to weed out a lot of the players simply coming here to derp and will also set a baseline for education and knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post

For a one on one course perhaps have a lobby on TS for designated trainers to idle in to accept requests if they have downtime with an emphasis that it is down to their discretion and warn against spam?

Share this post


Link to post

I like the concept. I also think it still needs work. Here are my questions.

 

"Basic Soldiering Skills Lesson Plan"

 

1. For how many candidates per lesson are you aiming ?

2. I feel this needs standardization by making the plan very concrete, instead of it being abstract and for more interpretation applicable. This comes from my personal experience with following the same courses in UOTC, but with very different details.

 

"This will require a small mission..."

 

3. Is this mission already made?

3a. if no, does it need to be added to the implementation? Why (not)?

3b. if yes, does it need to be added to the implementation? Why (not)?

 

 

4. I miss SOP changes for the bannable offense of getting on the primary without having the tag.

Share this post


Link to post

What if you were to split the program into the lesson and the exercise and allow people to attend the lesson or watch an instructional video before attending the exercise? This would lighten the load on instructors and allow for teaching of soldiering skills without scheduling issues. As long as the exercise was tailored to test the skills of the individual player as well as the team, it would be fairly easy to monitor whether or not they actually retained knowledge from the video; if not, attending the lesson would be mandated.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually training videos would be great, you have a very standardised content and you only need to test that people have watched them and that they follow them. Also on a side note the videos could be done as a community project i.e multiple personalities on each section either by narration or acting, throw a little humour to maintain interest, It could be a nice team building exercise which I think that the community could do with... yeah and now I sound like my ASDA manager...

Edited by Cunnah

Share this post


Link to post

I actually find this a great concept, which would indeed make sure that we would only get people in who had a minimum knowledge of what they are doing, and what is expect of them. Would be also nice to have in this Basic course a little overview over the more advanced slots, so as to explain what each slot does, and the differences there are in our community from others or ArmA ( Artillery/Mortars, CAS and so on).

Share this post


Link to post

This is a fantastic concept by Thawk and can only improve everyone's experience, when on the primary server.

 

Please remember this is as much to help and assist new players, as much as it is to enhance everyone else's game play.

 

On a personal level, being relatively new to UO. I needed this course to help me understand what is expected of ones self and what to exspect when confronted with the minefield that is UO primary server.

Share this post


Link to post

My only concern is how maintainable this concept is in the long run. My question is are we going to be able to maintain these courses on a daily basis (or as needed), without burning out the instructors?

Share this post


Link to post

My only concern is how maintainable this concept is in the long run. My question is are we going to be able to maintain these courses on a daily basis (or as needed), without burning out the instructors?

Correct me if I'm wrong, I heard they may let other people besides the instructors teach it, so bassicly qualified people can teach it.

Share this post


Link to post

The BSS will only run everyday in a single week which is to be determined as the transition week. After that transition week the course will be held at two specific days and times to ensure a minimum amount of courses each week.

All certified member and regulars may hold BSS courses at dates, time and frequency of their choosing.

 

That's how I read it. Correct me, Thawk.

Share this post


Link to post

I work from home so if this becomes a thing and there is a syllabus I would probably be able to do small sessions between 1200Z and 1700Z weekdays. If that's any help to people.

Share this post


Link to post

The BSS will only run everyday in a single week which is to be determined as the transition week. After that transition week the course will be held at two specific days and times to ensure a minimum amount of courses each week.

All certified member and regulars may hold BSS courses at dates, time and frequency of their choosing.

 

That's how I read it. Correct me, Thawk.

 

Also with the use of forums and TS, new members can arrange sessions with instructors.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

My only concern is how maintainable this concept is in the long run. My question is are we going to be able to maintain these courses on a daily basis (or as needed), without burning out the instructors?

 

I have the same concern.

 

What I thought was: 40 minutes course. With the number of regulars we have, if each of us teaches one course every four months it should be enough. One can't get burnt out by that, and I think it's very, very little to ask from a regular.

 

I'm not however saying that should be asked, I'm just thinking numbers. I'd guess that at least 1/2 of the regularbase is either awol or have no interest at all in helping, but that's still ~40 minutes every 2 months for each regular. All that not yet considering any help from non-regulars alike, and for daily courses.

Share this post


Link to post

This concept already exists to an extent,the actual rules just need a little tweaking.

 

TS3 / Member Structure

- Guest

- UO Member

- UO Regular

- UO Officer

 

Guests are required to take a certain set of courses and make use of the training facilities where applicable. (access to the primary would be prohibited) Once familiarization or basic soldering has been completed guests then become a UO Member and are allowed to access the relevant primary server channels and facilities. "Regular-ship" and above remains unchanged.

 

Edit: Ignore this, already suggested. Serves me right for not reading the document first. :x

Edited by RustyUK

Share this post


Link to post

I have the same concern.

 

What I thought was: 40 minutes course. With the number of regulars we have, if each of us teaches one course every four months it should be enough. One can't get burnt out by that, and I think it's very, very little to ask from a regular.

 

I'm not however saying that should be asked, I'm just thinking numbers. I'd guess that at least 1/2 of the regularbase is either awol or have no interest at all in helping, but that's still ~40 minutes every 2 months for each regular. All that not yet considering any help from non-regulars alike, and for daily courses.

 

Basic courses do not necessarily have to be long in duration. Much of the material can be provided on the forums, reference our numerous guides on getting started and tactical play. During my CQB course, we spent most of the time on Scribblar with the instructor reading out slides, not a bad idea at all but with regards to saving time it's not like candidates are incapable of prior reading. As for any questions, the usual Q&A session would still be included. Thus, once a course is ready, only the testing element such as the FTX need be emphasized as the bulk duration of the course.

 

Edit: ​In hindsight this sounds like a major jibe towards the UOTC, it's not. More or less just my opinion on what could be done in order to reduce the workload of instructors and continue with he same quality of courses. Such has already been done with the basic fixed/rotary wing competency courses, with a test to earn the "tags."

Edited by RustyUK

Share this post


Link to post

Firstly, thanks for the positive replies. And on to the question answering.

 

I like the concept. I also think it still needs work. Here are my questions.

 

 

 

1. For how many candidates per lesson are you aiming ?

2. I feel this needs standardization by making the plan very concrete, instead of it being abstract and for more interpretation applicable. This comes from my personal experience with following the same courses in UOTC, but with very different details.

 

 

 

3. Is this mission already made?

3a. if no, does it need to be added to the implementation? Why (not)?

3b. if yes, does it need to be added to the implementation? Why (not)?

 

 

4. I miss SOP changes for the bannable offense of getting on the primary without having the tag.

1. Really this is up to the course leader, he can have a 1 on 1 class, or a class upwards of 20. I'm sure more capable instructors could do more and with the rigid structure of the course it could be taught to many people at one time. I will run this by UOTC and have a definite answer by poll time.

2. Yep, the lesson plan is not complete yet. What you see there is an outline. Before this is polled, there will be a comprehensive, strict lesson plan to follow.

3. Yes 75% and No 15%. Zumorc has a mission already on training which is essentially the BSS Course mission. However, it needs some small name changes and one or two additions and subtractions and it will be ready, once again, for polling.

3a. N/A

3b. Fair point, I will update the Implementation section to reflect that.

4. There was no plan to implement specific SOP as with many of our banable offences, they are not listed, they are covered under "Common Sense". I will run this buy the Officers before poll time.

 

 

What if you were to split the program into the lesson and the exercise and allow people to attend the lesson or watch an instructional video before attending the exercise? This would lighten the load on instructors and allow for teaching of soldiering skills without scheduling issues. As long as the exercise was tailored to test the skills of the individual player as well as the team, it would be fairly easy to monitor whether or not they actually retained knowledge from the video; if not, attending the lesson would be mandated.

Actually training videos would be great, you have a very standardised content and you only need to test that people have watched them and that they follow them. Also on a side note the videos could be done as a community project i.e multiple personalities on each section either by narration or acting, throw a little humour to maintain interest, It could be a nice team building exercise which I think that the community could do with... yeah and now I sound like my ASDA manager...

 

It has been proving that little people actually review pre-course material and this adds onto the course length. It is better to cover topics when everyone is present and attentive. It's like relying on college students to do optional readings, it just won't happen. (Spoken as a college student)

 

My only concern is how maintainable this concept is in the long run. My question is are we going to be able to maintain these courses on a daily basis (or as needed), without burning out the instructors?

 

Kevin and JB answered it pretty much.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, I heard they may let other people besides the instructors teach it, so bassicly qualified people can teach it.

The BSS will only run everyday in a single week which is to be determined as the transition week. After that transition week the course will be held at two specific days and times to ensure a minimum amount of courses each week.

All certified member and regulars may hold BSS courses at dates, time and frequency of their choosing.

 

That's how I read it. Correct me, Thawk.

 

To just put my own spin on it, the course will only have to be taught once a week per timezone over every single UOTC instructor and BSS Instructors which should be very manageable. BSS Instructors can, in their own time, teach the course where applicable to new members. This level of simplicity should allow it to be self-regulating.

 

On a side note, I am specifically interested in hearing Regular's opinions who will be voting straight up no. Rather then having it brought up during the voting process where it is rather futile to accommodate the problem.

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds like a great idea to me. I would gladly sign up to be a BSS Instructor and be evaluated.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't have any issues with what I've read so far, and I agree that this is what UO needs to have so that we can bring back the atmosphere of play and a reason for older players to return to the server.

Edited by Deathstrike

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...