Tournament ideas

posted on May 22nd, 2011, 8:38 pm

If you actually read the rest of my post, you'd know what I was talking about. It wasn't about what the tag itself means, it's the potential effect it has on people.

I did indeed read it. All of it. If you have no opinion one way or the other, then why single out the "Donator" tag as smacking of elitism? I agree with your point about Rank tags. Had you read all of my post you'd have seen that. I'm just wondering out loud in public why the Donator tag is different in your view. I've not seen any instances of people wearing this tag acting like they are the Chosen Ones.

And unlike so many, I actually do read all of a post and remember what was written before I reply. Not necessary to remind me in public of something I do anyway as a way to try scoring points with others. I actually tie my own shoes all by myself every day before I toddle off to work. I'm not your reg'lar Garden Variety poster. I pay attention to the meaning as well as the words.

[Tyler]

posted on May 22nd, 2011, 8:45 pm

Last edited by Tyler on May 22nd, 2011, 8:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

As I said, I wanted to know why he opposes one thing with potential to cause elitism, but never mentions another that has the exact same potential.

It hasn't happened on this forum so far, however the 'I paid money, so I'm above you' view  is a known part of a fandom minority. The major members of this forum are (usually) a bit too level-headed to fall into it easily, but not everyone is immune.

Your post looked more like oposition to the tags being capable of having the same effect when I read it. Maybe I read too quickly...

posted on May 22nd, 2011, 10:57 pm

Well, this summer I am planning on hosting a tournament, and I have some interesting ideas to mix things up . As far as tittles go... part me of likes this idea, and the other part worries about the elitist thing.

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 12:09 am

I think your idea sounds great but we don't need it. If I want to know who won a tournaent I could look and find the results.

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 12:59 am

What I don't understand about the InterWebs Rank Thing is why so many people are so fired up to get something which is essentially valueless. Some guy who's brand new comes into the lobby and sees Online Competitor A who wears the Rank title, "I am an FO God!". Safe bet the New Guy isn't going to do anything but decline an offer of a game from Online Competitor A. Even safer bet Online Competitor A isn't going to be able to see New Guy over the vision of how awesome he is. So Online Competitor A, secure in his self imposed rankdom, chuckles gleefully as yet another newbie falls without firing a shot. Without playing a single second of FO. Is this something we want to encourage? People not playing the game with each other because someone has a higher rank then the other? Before someone points out that all I am seeing is the negative side of things, I would like to point out, to borrow a phrase, "All of this has happened before". Games like MechWarrior 4, Starfleet Command III, CnC:Generals, and a whole host of others were severely damaged by the Interwebs Rank Thing. People play games to relax, to enjoy themselves, to have fun. Play well, yes. Play to win, yes. But the game is much more enjoyable without all the drama of playing only to win. If the thrill of victory is the sole reason someone is playing FO, then they are missing the point entirely. That point being this is a way to pleasantly waste a few spare hours with people whose interests are similar to our own who we are supposed to enjoy being around. And if the sole reason for winning is "I gotz ta get dat rly kewel rank badge or my InterWebs Life is just totally ruined!", then we have raised missing the point by at least two orders of magnitude. Is the FO Community so large we can create subdivisions within it without causing harm to the Community as a whole? You tell me. I just got here about three weeks ago.

Tell ya what. If someone rly rly rly needs a verah kewel Rank Badge to proudly display as part of their sig banner or avatar, I'll send them one. We shall create the special Rank of *drum roll* Incredibly Self Absorbed - 1st Class. the Next Rank in this system shall be *again with the drum roll* Desperately Desiring External Validation - 1st Class. And lastly, the final rank which shall be *Aw jeez! enough with the drum rolls already* Will Eat Ants to Draw Attention - 1st Class. No, as a matter of fact, I am not taking you seriously. I have not laughed so hard in years. Thank you so very much for that. I owe you big time. But then again I do not take myself seriously either. So what chance do others have?

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 10:12 am

I think we need to have rewards that are not quite so serious.

Maybe we could ask the Devs if the winner could have a ship named after them (individual ship, not class) or an appropriate name of their choosing.

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 11:47 am

I think we need to have rewards that are not quite so serious.

Maybe we could ask the Devs if the winner could have a ship named after them (individual ship, not class) or an appropriate name of their choosing.

Sounds like a great idea, or perhaps some input on one of the new models/designs or something like help to design a map when the campaign gets worked on down the track. But I am on the opinion, however small it may be, that a rank or avatar image of the winner would turn people away from playing that person especially new players.

I play to have fun, but after being defeated so many times early in the game I play against certain people who I know are around my skill level. It's no fun to get crippled so early on by someone who has played this game for like a year or more and know all the counters to a particular stragety. A rank in the forums would only get to encourage this type of thinking and the poor fella who wins may find himself isolated when trying to have an online game with only the more experienced players wanting to play him to actually beat him.

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 12:24 pm

"will eat ants to draw attention"

Is the FO Community so large we can create subdivisions within it without causing harm to the Community as a whole? You tell me. I just got here about three weeks ago.

nope, we cant subdivide the community. things are going great now, loads of new members, tunngle adverts and easy online play. it cant last forever, though. a2 disks arent easy to find currently. eventually the new member flow will go dry. then every member will be important.

[Kestrel]

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 12:45 pm

Last edited by Kestrel on May 23rd, 2011, 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

What I don't understand about the InterWebs Rank Thing is why so many people are so fired up to get something which is essentially valueless. Some guy who's brand new comes into the lobby and sees Online Competitor A who wears the Rank title, "I am an FO God!". Safe bet the New Guy isn't going to do anything but decline an offer of a game from Online Competitor A. Even safer bet Online Competitor A isn't going to be able to see New Guy over the vision of how awesome he is. So Online Competitor A, secure in his self imposed rankdom,

This could happen..... or it most likely will not since they are forum ranks not tunngle ranks and most people have totaly different names on the forum to their tunngle names.

I think we need to have rewards that are not quite so serious.

Maybe we could ask the Devs if the winner could have a ship named after them (individual ship, not class) or an appropriate name of their choosing.

Thats exactly what im looking for an alternate suggestion no one has to accept my proposal but at least think of something else that we could have instead, i was just trying to think of a way to reward all the participants in the tournament rather than just the winner but that sounds like a nice idea having a ship named after them, i like this.

As for my idea we could try it and if this elitist nonesense came about the devs on the forum could just remove the ranks again but i really dont see this type of thing happening.

My idea was supposed to be similer to where a forum has an arcade and when you get a high score in the arcade you get like this achievment below your name saying pacman champion or something like that.

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 3:33 pm

My personal opinion Kestrel is the community is too small to risk alienating any new players really.
This could cause serious problems, and therefore I believe it's a bad idea. I'm not saying I'm right, just giving my opinion.

But yes, the torny would be cool to have some kind of reward.

posted on May 23rd, 2011, 3:48 pm

Perhaps consider also that many of the current players have not been around for *very long* - there may be some complaints from older players if rewards start being given out, since those rewards would not account for the extra weeks/months/years of playing.

We're a small community still: isn't the reward having your name remembered amongst everybody, your games talked about, your tactics learned? . If the community were much larger, and individual players were nameless without recognition, it would seem like titles/accomplishments of this sort wouldn't be as big a deal. However, almost everybody in this community has played again, or at least knows of, every other online player. That seems to me that it makes interpersonal relationships more important, and thus it is more aggravating when other players don't think one person deserves their 'title' or status, etc.

posted on May 24th, 2011, 12:59 am

nope, we cant subdivide the community. things are going great now, loads of new members, tunngle adverts and easy online play. it cant last forever, though. a2 disks arent easy to find currently. eventually the new member flow will go dry. then every member will be important.

Hence why A2 should be opensource, it confuses me why it hasn't considering it is now 10 years old, which by gaming standards is ancient.

posted on May 24th, 2011, 5:05 am

I was going to come in here asking why people are arguing over something this trivial, until I realized there are valid points here for both sides. (First time for everything, yeh? Kidding.)

I do see some merit on the side of adding ranks, not as a sense of superiority, but to add a sense of accomplishment. Things such as a certain number of wins (or expertise) for a specific race, or last player standing on the losing team in a 4v4, might be nice to have. It gives players a more visible goal to reach than simply "Hey, that guy is pretty good with Dominion".

On the other side, there will be issues with elitism and condescension. I think we already have enough of that, both in the form of players talking down to others who they perceive as being of a lower skill level, and by mediocre players who simply like to light a flashing beacon to draw attention to their parents' failure to teach them decency or manners. Just as ranks might add more tactile goals, they'll also add a more tactile point of reference for pretentiousness to be rained down from.

Overall, I'm more against than for this. Although I've learned to avoid certain players because of their attitudes towards others, and anyone else can do the same, it still adds to the issue. Anyone using ranks as a reason to be elitist isn't needed here, and I'd be fine with cutting out the cancer and having a smaller, healthier community for it. That said, why add a feature that will quite likely encourage these negative traits from people who don't currently show them?