Jump to content

Addition of 4.10 to the charter: Barrier of Entry  

90 members have voted

  1. 1. Addition of 4.10 to the charter: Barrier of Entry

    • Yes
      65
    • No
      25


Recommended Posts

From reading much of this post it seems that there is confusion about the B2E.

 

When it was proposed the intent was to implement a requirement for players to make an effort prior to allowing them to game here at UO.  Having a short course (or review of a reference) is a small effort but would weed out those players who are unwilling to make any effort at all.  The problem was with implementation – who would teach? Or review?  The solution proposed was to provide a weekly course (40min) for 6 months and if the community was able to deliver the course each week we might try a trial of making the course mandatory.

 

This proposal removes the requirement for entry but would impose a performance standard.  Those who fail to meet the standard would be required to improve to continue playing.  It seems that the proposal for requiring skills has generated controversy.

  • Currently we do not have a standard.  Hellhounds guide is a great assistance but requires interpretation if used for assessments and is subjective as basis for rejection of players.  A player could be rejected or accepted depending on who is evaluating and comparing. 
  • Currently we do not have training that will enable players to develop.  Even with the excellent resources available many players need practice and supervision in order to gain the skills proposed.  Attending a 2 hour course where players listen to information and explanations, look at a few visual aids and try a drill once or twice will not give many of us the skills we hope for.  Watching videos and reviewing excellent manuals is helpful but even players with a sincere desire to learn often need more input to execute what they learn in game.  Practice on the primary can work very well with the right mentor,  but practicing the drills incorrectly is counterproductive.
  • We don’t have an assessment method or process developed that will ensure players is evaluated fairly and consistently.  All judgment would prone to bias and favoritism.

 

Perhaps we could sway more players to vote yes if we provided reassurance regarding this change:

  1. The standard expected is very low – perhaps a simple description of basic skills that are required.  Surely we can’t expect players to proficient (without a clear standard or training) but perhaps we can expect that they know some of the very easy stuff.
  2. The assessment of a player’s competency will be objective and based on the simple description of basic skills required.

So in an effort to gain more yes votes ------ can we list the simple skills we expect?  Simple skills that are measurable?

Share this post


Link to post

Didn't you vote NO Darkside?

I absolutely did vote no; I'm confused at your reply.. are you under the impression I'm advocating for barrier of entry? Please take a step back and read what I've typed..

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with this; refer to my previous post. We have a solution to this problem we're trying to fix with BoE; let's try that first IMO.

I too was a bit confused by this, but what is this other solution that you talk of?

Share this post


Link to post

Voting no. This was a very hard decision for me, because prior to getting my new workload my playtime slowly deteriorated on the primary due to lack of tactical play, and just plain green players. I acknowledged once I went back to work that this was a poor mindset, and in order to try to better the quality of game play it was us as regulars who had to step up and lead by example; and enforce the rules that we expect enforced. When I came here last year from 7th Cav, I was a very fresh fish myself. Mr2 showed me UO; and helped me with the basics; as well as emulating some of the regs early on, I was able to mesh relatively well. I don't think we need a system to alienate these players further. I use tactical Tuesday as an example; We have a large showing of regs every Tuesday; and we establish that we'll enforce the rules. These sometimes might not go super well as far as mission standards go, but the standard of game play dramatically rises. We've also done a tactical Monday in the past as well. What these two weekly mini-events have in common are the vast showing of regulars, and numerous players that want to have a tactical experience. The problem I see with this is that we dedicate particular days to play how we should on a daily basis; we need to get out of this mindset and play regularly as a community; I assure you a large daily showing of regulars would greatly improve the quality of the primary.

 

 

I personally don't think this system will be a long-term fix; and will slowly close the doors for new players interested in joinning the community.

 

Guess my post got buried. I think an increased regular presence is our solution.

Edited by Darkside

Share this post


Link to post

So your solution is to have more regulars on the server, correct?

You don't specify any means to this end where as the current proposal is a tool and method that may very well result in an increased everyday presence of regulars.

Share this post


Link to post

So your solution is to have more regulars on the server, correct?

You don't specify any means to this end where as the current proposal is a tool and method that may very well result in an increased everyday presence of regulars.

My solution is that regulars no longer be deterred by new players, and non tactical game play. My solution is that we as a community step up and mold this misinformed new majority into a viable group of players. This tool you speak of will slowly close the doors to new players, and players deterred by these high standards. I know most of you at this point are thinking "why would we want these players if they aren't willing to put effort forth" but Zzez had a point earlier. New players are the lifeblood of UO. If the servers population is small, people don't join, or leave anyways, so how is this a long term fix? Maybe I'm wrong. I think this change is well written and presented, and absolutely would improve the quality game play on the server, but at what cost is my major concern.

Edited by Darkside

Share this post


Link to post

Funny you say that. 

 

The way I see it, Krause has presented a solution and those who are attacking it, can't even present valid arguments against it. The only argument they do present is that they are being attacked Ad Hominem.

 

I am defending the solution that has been presented.

 

P.S. Come to think of it, some of you are voting NO, just because it is Krause's proposal. Makes me want to puke.

Edited by Rambo2

Share this post


Link to post

Take it down a notch. Darkside expresses a valid concern that could easily be addresses without brining up the Soviet Union.

However I need to sleep but I might adress it tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post

Funny you say that. 

 

The way I see it, Krause has presented a solution and those who are attacking it, can't even present valid arguments against it. The only argument they do present is that they are being attacked Ad Hominem.

 

I am defending the solution that has been presented.

I think this change is well written and presented, and absolutely would improve the quality game play on the server, but at what cost is my major concern.

 

Did you read that part of my statement? You 'think' I'm attacking it, so you feel the need to try and attack me? Grow up man, you look like a clown with those kind of half assed replies. At least take the time to read that I'm not opposed to the idea, I'm opposed to the loss of new players.

Share this post


Link to post

Guess my post got buried. I think an increased regular presence is our solution.

 

I remember saying this a long with all the other regulars 2 years ago when things started to slip and we were becoming popular (lots of new players over the summer), and it has continued to be said since then while gameplay on the server continued to decline.  Your idea is not a new Idea, it has been preached and shouted and demanded before, and never with any effect, because when people do come on to the servers they dont stick around because the quality of play deteriorates dramaticly when there is not an overwhelming number of regs to herd the cats and make command chains sane.

Share this post


Link to post

I think this change is well written and presented, and absolutely would improve the quality game play on the server, but at what cost is my major concern.

 

Did you read that part of my statement? You 'think' I'm attacking it, so you feel the need to try and attack me? Grow up man, you look like a clown with those kind of half assed replies. At least take the time to read that I'm not opposed to the idea, I'm opposed to the loss of new players.

 

If someone is incapable of reading a guide and, comprehending and or practicing on their own before they click yes to get the password and join primary, I would argue they are not the kind of person we want around here.   

 

When I first join in UO's first months, I watched multiple videos, read everything I could on the forums, practiced some basics off-line before joining the server so that I would not be a complete newb and look like an idiot.  This amendment does not ask a lot of new players, and as a community every tool they could ever need to succeed is provided for them for free.  I think there has to be a bar set, and this will help to do that.  Its almost like were bringing up the bottom, so that more of the top (old regs) will come back and then everyone can meet in the middle.  

Share this post


Link to post

I remember saying this a long with all the other regulars 2 years ago when things started to slip and we were becoming popular (lots of new players over the summer), and it has continued to be said since then while gameplay on the server continued to decline.  Your idea is not a new Idea, it has been preached and shouted and demanded before, and never with any effect, because when people do come on to the servers they dont stick around because the quality of play deteriorates dramaticly when there is not an overwhelming number of regs to herd the cats and make command chains sane.

I don't think I'm coming up with an original idea; it's a natural deduction.

 

 

If someone is incapable of reading a guide and, comprehending and or practicing on their own before they click yes to get the password and join primary, I would argue they are not the kind of person we want around here.   

 

When I first join in UO's first months, I watched multiple videos, read everything I could on the forums, practiced some basics off-line before joining the server so that I would not be a complete newb and look like an idiot.  This amendment does not ask a lot of new players, and as a community every tool they could ever need to succeed is provided for them for free.  I think there has to be a bar set, and this will help to do that.  Its almost like were bringing up the bottom, so that more of the top (old regs) will come back and then everyone can meet in the middle.  

 

I didn't read a guide, I didn't practice before I joined. I dpve right into UO with a completely open mind, ready to absorb everything around me. I would not have taken the same approach you did, in watching videos, and reading everything I could before stepping foot onto the server. I took bits and pieces, and played, because I think experience is absolutely everything. I don't feel we should have to find a median so 'old' regs will come back, though I guess they have lost interest due to these poor conditions but so have alot of us 'new' guys and we still put effort forth to try and make this community a better place.

Edited by Darkside

Share this post


Link to post

and players deterred by these high standards.

 

What's to say there won't be other new players who will see the "high standards" and think "actually, that looks pretty good, I want to be a part of that."

 

I don't think it's too unlikely that people with a good mindset for MilSim will want to join a community that has a higher quality of play than others. Right now I think many new players - the type of new player we need - are being deterred by the gameplay on the server.

Share this post


Link to post

IMHO, The community that started with the headiness of a successful revolution full of ideas of openness, freedom and democracy and twenty something players that had played together for a couple of years prior, no longer exists. Somehow striving for recognition led to the numbers game and the slow disappearance of the homey little gaming community of friends we once knew. It has grown so fast that it is mass of players that can not be controlled by the Magna Carta Libertatum drawn up by the founding members. In the case of a gaming community of this size, democracy and leading by committee is beginning to implode upon itself. A board of directors either appointed or elected needs to take a strong hand to get UO back on the track set forth by the founding members, the way it should be, not by what the masses want. There needs to be "The Buck Stops Here" group, otherwise you will get more of what you have now only worse.

Let the stoning begin.

Share this post


Link to post

What's to say there won't be other new players who will see the "high standards" and think "actually, that looks pretty good, I want to be a part of that."

 

I don't think it's too unlikely that people with a good mindset for MilSim will want to join a community that has a higher quality of play than others. Right now I think many new players - the type of new player we need - are being deterred by the gameplay on the server.

I think quite a few people will see it that way, and I like that very much. I'm simply worried there won't be enough of these players.

Share this post


Link to post

Why would I care if new players are deterred, not that it would matter because this is supposed to be a tool to weed out the problem players unwilling to learn. We were founded on the idea that we rather have a platoon operating at its highest efficiency with competent players than a company which is mired by inexperienced derpy players(quality over quantity. I do not play arma to teach people how to play, and constantly push for game play I find acceptable. Sure I am always down to explain a bit on the go but it becomes a full time job with my free time on the server which is not why I play. UOTC has always been the resource used for players who come here and want to excel at what they do ingame, and that is why this ammendment has put it on their shoulders as to the classification of basic skills. Enforcing Hellhounds Guide is simple, it contains the most basic of instructions and is fully catered to "how do I come on the server and not make an ass of myself". I dont understand the lack of critical thinking on some regs in the myriad of ways this can be enforced, or the apparent distrust of the gm/reg/officer base to somehow out of the blue start banning people left and right. I come and play at UO in my free time because I want to hop into ts and the server, take a leadership position and accomplish something in game, whether taking a town or beating a whole mission. I have tried repeatedly to do this over the last few months and every time I come out exhausted and unwilling to play anymore because of derpy players who dont know basics or just fail at competency in game. This is why I only usually play during events. Its sad that we have such a huge majority of the founders and old members petitioning for this amendment and we are being blocked by new regulars who clearly dont understand what UO was made to accomplish in the arma community. We clearly should have been much more strict in all our regular application voting.

 

If someone is incapable of reading a guide and, comprehending and or practicing on their own before they click yes to get the password and join primary, I would argue they are not the kind of person we want around here.   

 

Share this post


Link to post

Guess my post got buried. I think an increased regular presence is our solution.

Why does a large presence of Regulars be required for an acceptable level of gameplay?  At any time no matter who's own we should expect to be able to get on the server and it not to be shit.  Is it too much to ask that we all treat every day as if it was TacTues?  Regulars and members alike.

Share this post


Link to post

At any time no matter who's own we should expect to be able to get on the server and it not to be shit.  Is it too much to ask that we all treat every day as if it was TacTues?  Regulars and members alike.

 

This. /thread

Share this post


Link to post

Why does a large presence of Regulars be required for an acceptable level of gameplay?  At any time no matter who's own we should expect to be able to get on the server and it not to be shit.  Is it too much to ask that we all treat every day as if it was TacTues?  Regulars and members alike.

Yes treat every day like TacTues which has a large regular presence of reg's enforcing rules, we're talking about the same TacTues correct? Because I'd be willing to bet if we had a 'tactues' without the same showing of regs, and like minded players it'd be just as mediocre as everyday game play. Acceptable is subjective as well; those players when they become the majority assume that the way they play is acceptable because no one is there to tell them different, we just run and tell each other how bad it is. If you want the server to be up to 'acceptable' standards, people need to be there to enforce these rules.

Share this post


Link to post

We were founded on the idea that we rather have a platoon operating at its highest efficiency with competent players than a company which is mired by inexperienced derpy players

Haha, funny how often it changes what UO was founded on this week.

 

 

Why does a large presence of Regulars be required for an acceptable level of gameplay?  At any time no matter who's own we should expect to be able to get on the server and it not to be shit.  Is it too much to ask that we all treat every day as if it was TacTues?  Regulars and members alike.

Are you fucking kidding me? Regulars are the people who aren't shit, don't pick fights and want to vote. Gee I wonder how those outside this group could possible have a harder time making it work.

Share this post


Link to post

So your solution is to have more regulars on the server, correct?

You don't specify any means to this end where as the current proposal is a tool and method that may very well result in an increased everyday presence of regulars.

 

If this poll fails which it looks like it will at this point, what will the regulars do in the meantime?  Keep refusing to play?  That's a terrible excuse.  More regulars on the server leads to better gameplay and higher player counts.  Anyone who plays on the server can see that.  So we as regulars need to cry less and get on the server and play.  Doesn't matter if it's not Tac Tuesday, like kalohe said, it shouldn't matter.  So be the change that makes it not matter.  The regulars who play REGULARLY do a great job at what they can.  Sometimes we're overburdened and you'll see a quality slip, but that's easily fixed by having one or two more regulars on.

 

noun

23.
a long-standing or habitual customer or client: The restaurant can always find tables for its regulars.
 
How are you a regular if you no longer play regularly? What good are you doing by sitting in the barracks, bitching about Primary?
 
This poll is going to fail, and it will be several weeks until it or something similar can be repolled.  Take it upon yourselves to get on the primary and play to improve the server in the meantime.  Or resign your regularship, because you are not contributing to fixing the problem by not playing.

Share this post


Link to post

 

If this poll fails which it looks like it will at this point, what will the regulars do in the meantime?  Keep refusing to play?  That's a terrible excuse.  More regulars on the server leads to better gameplay and higher player counts.  Anyone who plays on the server can see that.  So we as regulars need to cry less and get on the server and play.  Doesn't matter if it's not Tac Tuesday, like kalohe said, it shouldn't matter.  So be the change that makes it not matter.  The regulars who play REGULARLY do a great job at what they can.  Sometimes we're overburdened and you'll see a quality slip, but that's easily fixed by having one or two more regulars on.

 

noun

23.
a long-standing or habitual customer or client: The restaurant can always find tables for its regulars.
 
How are you a regular if you no longer play regularly? What good are you doing by sitting in the barracks, bitching about Primary?
 
This poll is going to fail, and it will be several weeks until it or something similar can be repolled.  Take it upon yourselves to get on the primary and play to improve the server in the meantime.  Or resign your regularship, because you are not contributing to fixing the problem by not playing.

 

Could not agree more.

 

Why does a large presence of Regulars be required for an acceptable level of gameplay?  At any time no matter who's own we should expect to be able to get on the server and it not to be shit.  Is it too much to ask that we all treat every day as if it was TacTues?  Regulars and members alike.

Why does a large presence of Regulars be required for an acceptable level of gameplay? --- Because regulars have a bigger impression on the guests of the community, especially when on the server. Without their presence, many users feel more able, and comfortable, when derping around or doing things they shouldn't be. Sure, any respected/trusted guest can report a player to a GM or regular but then they have to go through witnesses and the person never ends up getting banned; I have seen this happen first-hand.

 

At any time no matter who's own we should expect to be able to get on the server and it not to be shit.  --- You cannot expect this from an open community, anyone can come on. Without proper monitoring the server can fall into anyone's hands and anything can happen. 

 

Is it too much to ask that we all treat every day as if it was TacTues?  --- Yes, yes it is. So, let's not allow anyone who isn't known enough to be able to lead squads, and only regulars can lead missions every day of the week... wait.. isn't that something, huh ... only regulars can lead on Tac Tues. Now, don't misinterpret me here as I have no problem with this seeing as it only happens on Tuesday, but isn't this telling you something? Regulars are required for the kind of gameplay quality we get on Tac Tuesday. Only regulars can lead, and trustworthy, reliable, competent guests can be in leadership or mission-critical roles; this is not the case any other day of the week.

Edited by Gabee

Share this post


Link to post

 

If this poll fails which it looks like it will at this point, what will the regulars do in the meantime?  Keep refusing to play?  That's a terrible excuse.  More regulars on the server leads to better gameplay and higher player counts.  Anyone who plays on the server can see that.  So we as regulars need to cry less and get on the server and play.  Doesn't matter if it's not Tac Tuesday, like kalohe said, it shouldn't matter.  So be the change that makes it not matter.  The regulars who play REGULARLY do a great job at what they can.  Sometimes we're overburdened and you'll see a quality slip, but that's easily fixed by having one or two more regulars on.

 

noun

23.
a long-standing or habitual customer or client: The restaurant can always find tables for its regulars.
 
How are you a regular if you no longer play regularly? What good are you doing by sitting in the barracks, bitching about Primary?
 
This poll is going to fail, and it will be several weeks until it or something similar can be repolled.  Take it upon yourselves to get on the primary and play to improve the server in the meantime.  Or resign your regularship, because you are not contributing to fixing the problem by not playing.

 

This. This so much. A while ago, a lot of regulars played on the server. Now, not so much. In this time, the quality of play has decreased. Maybe the regulars were role models, someone for a new player to look up to because the new player knows that they set the example of the individual, and each individual should be up to those standards. 

 

 

afcvlu.png

 

 

More regulars, better quality of play.

Edited by Kevin31

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...