Changing the Community for the Better

[NervyDestroyer]

I said I was going to wait until after finals, but I have time now and wish to write it so that's what I'm doing :)


Some Background and Shtuff
Everyone has their theories and their ideas on how to "fix" Battlenight. Here's the deal, after dedicating much time to finding a solution to "fix" Battlenight, I have come to the conclusion that there is nothing inherently wrong with Battlenight. Battlenight does what is sought to do, create a war-like simulation where 2 sides fight for territory in a war environment. There was no secret, no surprise. Most of what I hear now is "Battlenight is too competitive!" Certainly true! You are correct! Of course a war is competitive. I'd love to see a war that wasn't competitive because that would truly be something...

You probably didn't expect to hear that from me, since I was one of the most vocal oppositions to the competitiveness of Battlenight. After a while of searching for solutions, I begin to think that maybe I'm trying to fix the wrong thing. Fix something that just isn't fixable without sacrificing what a war-sim actually is.

Here's the deal, most people don't have time for this community. It's really demanding. Everyone is so worried that "oh if we don't do something we'll lose recruits oh noes!" That's actually what's doing the opposite. There is absolutely no structure save Battlenight and absolutely no variety. All we do is Battlenight. And it's non-stop almost. Peacetime is a freaking welcome break from the constant pressures of preparing for Battlenight. Let's face it, Battlenight is stressful on anyone in a leadership position. Having to schedule practices, having methods dah dah dah. I have had to sacrifice time with family to make sure everything went smooth during Battlenight. And you damn well bet I have a problem with that! I wonder how much time others have sacrificed. I certainly can't be alone. Unless you don't sleep. At all.

So with that in mind, I tried to add variety, but didn't have the time and found most in the community don't either. Why do you think every event that's not Battlenight doesn't last long? Blaming and vilifying the people here is pretty damn bad. Expecting people to prep for Battlenight AND attend a thousand events? Let's be realistic please.

Please remember a week is only 7 days. 7 days, that's it. Not a lot of time when you think about it...

So all my attempts to add variety with my squad and the community failed because of lack of time.




Solution!
Here is the bomb, What if Battlenight wasn't every weekend?
It would certainly alleviate all the issues I have listed above while giving that variety that will keep the place fresh and new. I have a plan on how to do this also.

Everything will begin anew after a 3 week period, this means that Battlenight is every 3 weeks rather than every week:

One week is Battlenight, which takes place on Saturday and Sunday
Another week is a heavy lore-based event that captures the fun of ranks and leadership
A "bye-week" for competitive tourneys or fun customs, whatever tickles your fancy


The heavy lore-based weekend can also affect the warmap so the wars wouldn't extend at all. Even if it doesn't, it extends the war by one third meaning that instead of a 3 month war, it would be a 4 month war, not that bad. I know people are practically begging for lore events to come back, I know there's a demand for it. Even if you're not that interested, are you not going to give it a go and see if you like it? Will you do nothing for the week instead? I for one, am excited at the possibilities for a lore week. We can have all the raids, all the lore of squad tactics. Don't tell me it can't be done dammit, I know it can. If I can get an A in Chemistry, you can set up a Lore week k???

The "bye-week" is for a nice relaxing week, nothing crazy, some tourneys if you want or some customs on games. Hell take the time to recruit. You got time to recruit and also time to clear your head and do what you want. This will alleviate the stress for both the leaders and the players where leading the community and the craziness that can ensue, it'd be nice to have a little break. And before you say that we shouldn't have to have a break, even when you're having super fun at an amusement park, you still gotta sit down and take a break and eat or just to let the adrenaline wear off a bit. Same concept here.

Then the Battlenight week. This is just normal Battlenight. Takes place on Saturday and Sunday at 6 as usual. This allows for people that can't come on Sunday for a chance to come Saturday and vice-versa. I believe this setup is worth a shot because I believe it can work. It gives plenty of time for attack plans and even practicing if you like the competition. I expect some truly amazing squads to surface in all of that time. Nothing wrong with that. Just normal Battlenight just 2 days instead of 1 and not every week.

Whew... Alright that was a lot of information. It's a big change, I know, but let me ask you something; is our current setup working? This is a change that took me a while to come up with. It's thinking outside of the box. It's unconventional, it changes a lot of how this community operates and that is precisely why I believe it will work. This leaves all of the core aspects in while adding many others and changing when things occur. This is what a community will be. What we are currently is a war-sim that does Battlenight. With this, we can actually be what we advertise ourselves be, a community that does wars and more. That is much more appealing to the ear. So be open minded about it, I don't want us to do the shit that isn't working now, I want this place to succeed.

An argument I can see being made is that now if you miss a weekend, you have to wait an extra 3 weeks. Yes that's absolutely true. If you want to continue having stressful Battlenights because you gotta wait a little longer when you go on vacation, then I don't really have a solution to that. This solution is meant to make more time available to all involved. The current system we have now certainly has its flaws that aren't in this change. If you're thinking this then you are correct. I am under no illusion that this solution is absolutely 100% perfect and perhaps there will be some sacrifices that will need to made by all involved. That's just the way it has to be sometimes...




The "even though it wasn't supposed to be a rant" Rant
Allow me to make this next part perfectly clear, because if one more person talks about why another squad is the problem, I'm going to rant like there's no tomorrow. As hilarious as it would be don't let it happen...

If you are sick of losing in Battlenight, get better. That's it! It's really that simple. I can say that because I'm one of the worst Halo 5 players there is right now. I suck at it. If I want to compete at a higher level I need to get better. "But how do we get better?" You gotta practice and practice and practice. Play with each other on Matchmaking, practice the maps, know the maps. This solution won't make you magically start winning nor was it ever intended to. This is to alleviate harsh time constraints and add variety to a community rapidly growing stale. So please stop blaming that squad over there for being too good and that leader over there for forcing you to play that squad. Back in the last war of MCC, I didn't want my squad to play VbD for that reason. Well you wanna know what happened when I pressured leadership to change that? Well Equinox got the shit end of the stick that night for having to play VbD pretty much the whole night. I don't blame VbD or leadership for that, I blame myself for being a twat. That's what happens when you get into that mindset. And don't even tell me that higher tiered squads need to go. That is just backwards thinking. First you remove one squad, then all of the sudden that squad over there looks a lot better now that the best squad is gone. Better remove them too. Oh you practiced and got too good? Well fuck you. Just stop and work to get better if you hate it so much. I had one of the best nights of my life playing with Ghost when we lost to VbD on Strongholds by 198 points. It was great fun and Solus and the others in the party can attest to that. So if you are sick of losing, you gotta grit your teeth and start practicing. Maybe you won't be the best squad, but you'll be a damn better squad as a result. If not, you have to accept the reality that losing will be common, and you gotta just have fun with it.

Okay /rant.


So to recap, Battlenight every 3 weeks on Saturday and Sunday. Inbetween have a lore week and a "bye-week" as explained high above. It can work really well if everyone can see the benefits. I would implore you not to read this one paragraph as a TL;DR because then you don't know the solution and will purposefully make yourself ignorant of a possible good solution.


Please post your thoughts, no good solution came without criticism. I will adjust accordingly if you make a strong case and make sense.


EDITS

The majority wants to do a 2 week cycle. I'm not strongly against it, but I would prefer to have the "Bye-week" potential for community events for such. I want that "Bye-Week" for squad events, community events, and others. I want this to be a week where chemistry is fleshed out for squads through Matchmaking or whatever squad leaders can come up with. I'm willing to compromise with the 2 week cycle, but I truly wouldn't wish to see this thrown out altogether. Adapted maybe?

Another thing I would like to point out. This solution is also a compromise. The Battlenight is for those that see the potential and fun that comes with Battlenight and would hate to see it go. The lore week is for those that love the lore of FC and want to have the WARSIM fleshed out in a pure role-play environment. The "Bye-week" is for those that desire a lighter side to FC where there are events whether competitive or a little more casual. This week or maybe even couple of days or whatever adaptation is made will allow for recruiting squad building with Matchmaking or other chemistry building techniques. If you only like one of these aspects, note that others around you like the other aspects as well.

One more thing, this solution does not change any of the core aspects of FC. It only changes the methods that they are implemented. I want the core aspects to be further fleshed out while also paving the ground for everyone to find their place. I wish to see that happen. If I didn't care about the values FC was founded on, I would push for less emphasis on Battlenight and less emphasis on lore. I don't want that. Both have their ups and downs and I want them fully fleshed out. I want to work with vets on the lore week because you guys know much better than me what a role-play of an army looks like in its purest form. I hope this alleviates some concerns?

[Barry Soap]

I think this is a great idea, but I'm more for 2 weeks as opposed to three (7 days might not be a lot but 21 is over half a month lol). I did actually quote your Skype message about this in the WC meeting but it may have been overlooked. However, this is a solution worthy of discussion, especially given the recent update. Thanks for putting the thread together, Nervy. :D

[polychromeVirus]

My main worry with this system is that it isn't readily obvious which weeks are battlenight and which weeks are other events. Obviously it will be posted in skype with plenty of time before each event but not everyone has skype/checks the forums (even though they should)

[NervyDestroyer]

I think this is a great idea, but I'm more for 2 weeks as opposed to three (7 days might not be a lot but 21 is over half a month lol). I did actually quote your Skype message about this in the WC meeting but it may have been overlooked. However, this is a solution worthy of discussion, especially given the recent update. Thanks for putting the thread together, Nervy. :D

I thought the same thing at first, but I really wanted to include the lore week because there has been a demand for it in the past. It would be a shame not to include it. 21 days is a lot of time and maybe if should be 2 weeks on some rotation scale. It's another thing to consider I suppose


My main worry with this system is that it isn't readily obvious which weeks are battlenight and which weeks are other events. Obviously it will be posted in skype with plenty of time before each event but not everyone has skype/checks the forums (even though they should)

Communication is much better off than it was in the past. I would say this wouldn't be too much of an issue as long as it is emphasized heavily and making sure people know the schedule. There are ways to do this. Something to consider nonetheless, communication would be absolutely necessary.

[WolfPack23]

I can see this as a test idea, and if it works Hey! if not, well it's good to do lore stuff am I right?

[Anarchy]

This was probably the most reasonable depiction of what's going on in FC with a reasonable change and timing I've seen in pretty much forever.

I might suggest an "Every other week" battle night instead, with the inbetweens alternating between a bye and a "lore" type event. Just a suggestion. Ultimately either course is pretty reasonable. People can argue all day about the why, but at the end of the day wars aren't being as fun as they were, and that much is true for almost everyone.

As for the rant,


That's what happens when you get into that mindset. And don't even tell me that higher tiered squads need to go. That is just backwards thinking. First you remove one squad, then all of the sudden that squad over there looks a lot better now that the best squad is gone. Better remove them too. Oh you practiced and got too good? Well fuck you.

I'd guess most people aren't thinking that way. Most people don't want to crucify a bunch of people for skill. But the focus on competition has been creeping up on us a while, and it should still be addressed. People can only practice so much, and while yeah there will always be groups performing better, at some point there's a certain dispersion in skill that has to be addressed in a civil manner for everyone's benefit. It gets painted in a "burn them till they submit" type suggestion, but it's really not, it's just people wanting some sort of progressive measures to prevent exceptionalism, regardless of guessing the cause or motive. It's still an issue IMO, though the solution is obviously not a civil war of turning on eachother that's perceived.



Back to the suggestion, FC has to evolve. The majority of us aren't 16 year olds clamoring to get on every single Sunday because we have tons of free time and Halo is like the only decent multiplayer game option besides CoD. Judging Halo's population demographic, that won't change anytime soon. We all want wars to be fun, and frankly having less might make them more fun just by being less in our face. If we focus on the fun, the growth will come easily over time.

[JamiDJ]

Great suggestion Nervy. I can support this.

[Nicholas Sapien]

My main worry with this system is that it isn't readily obvious which weeks are battlenight and which weeks are other events. Obviously it will be posted in skype with plenty of time before each event but not everyone has skype/checks the forums (even though they should)

Isn't that why there is a chain of command? so we can pass information much more easily?

I like your idea as well Nervy, even if you are a scrub.

Although I would rather have the battlenight/lore week cycle between the 2 and leave the bye week out

[Jam Cliché]

General concensus here is that wars aren't as fun, right? And that people get burned out by the time peacetime rolls around?
But what about what happens during peacetime? People are eager to get back to the war within a few weeks as well.

I don't think the schedule of battles is the issue here. That "burnout" is a product of baser issues that color player attitudes during the war. Interarmy differences, personal conflicts across army lines, malcontent attitudes towards leaders, balance-induced drops in motivation, etc. Perhaps we should be addressing those issues rather than throw more time between events?

If you extend the delay between battles, you lengthen the war even more, and those issues that hurt morale during war will still be there even during "bye" weeks. Then they will be there infecting members for twice or three times as long as they are now.

[Houdini]

Like a few other people already suggested, I would rather see a 2 week rotation instead of the 3 week rotation listed in the original post. I think 3 weeks might be too long to keep people engaged. Other than that, I would really like to see this implemented. A commitment to battle nights once every two weeks is much more reasonable for me and my current schedule.

This might have been touched, but I think it is worth emphasizing, this type of culture appeals much more to older members who have other real life commitments. I can't imagine high schoolers or even people with abundant free time to be interested in our community if we are taking a slower pace, but this would appeal more to people who do have other commitments (like me).

Regarding the competitive nature of wars, I think there is something to be said for making the community entirely competitive and just letting everything play out the way it plays out. There really isn't a problem where the best squad stomps on the worst squads and people either practice or deal with it. The real problem is when people don't agree on the vision for the community.

In my opinion, that type of culture is not what was established or discussed in my bootcamp or in any of the recruiting information when I joined. I joined under the impression that the only aspect of competition was the fact that the wars had a winner and a loser.

I think the real reason people get so mad is that when some people think of "competitiveness" they have the same perspective you shared where the winner is the winner and you either practice or deal with it. That is a perfectly fine model and that is something that is viable. That type of culture is basically what MLG type events support.

The other perspective on competition is more similar to matchmaking. Halo 5 matchmaking at least in my limited experience is actually quite good at creative competitive games that are also balanced. There is still a winner and a loser and everybody is trying to win, but the people you are playing against are balanced against your skill. This is just as much a competitive atmosphere as what MLG type competition supports, it is simply different.

Balance and competitiveness can exist together, but they don't necessarily have to. If this community wants to shift to a more pure MLG like competitive structure that is fine. The people who don't like this model should leave and the people who stay need to make sure that is the vision that is advertised to recruits. A lot of the conflicts we see are from people using different definitions and expectations of competition.

- - - Updated - - -


If you extend the delay between battles, you lengthen the war even more, and those issues that hurt morale during war will still be there even during "bye" weeks. Then they will be there infecting members for twice or three times as long as they are now.

I posted before I read this, but I do think this is an objection that needs to be addressed. If the wars are going smoothly Nervy's plan is solid. When stuff isn't going very well, all we are doing with this system is delaying the inevitable and allowing more time for discontent to be spread.

[Barry Soap]

I'd guess most people aren't thinking that way. Most people don't want to crucify a bunch of people for skill. But the focus on competition has been creeping up on us a while, and it should still be addressed. People can only practice so much, and while yeah there will always be groups performing better, at some point there's a certain dispersion in skill that has to be addressed in a civil manner for everyone's benefit. It gets painted in a "burn them till they submit" type suggestion, but it's really not, it's just people wanting some sort of progressive measures to prevent exceptionalism, regardless of guessing the cause or motive. It's still an issue IMO, though the solution is obviously not a civil war of turning on eachother that's perceived.

Back to the suggestion, FC has to evolve. The majority of us aren't 16 year olds clamoring to get on every single Sunday because we have tons of free time and Halo is like the only decent multiplayer game option besides CoD. Judging Halo's population demographic, that won't change anytime soon. We all want wars to be fun, and frankly having less might make them more fun just by being less in our face. If we focus on the fun, the growth will come easily over time.

Everything you've said here I completely agree with. I pointed out in the War Council meeting that although there is a possibility of members getting better at Halo by playing a lot, they would require about 16 hours a week for a long time before they're maybe at the point of not getting whomped on Sunday. We all know that the people here absolutely do not have enough time for that, albeit that they actually want to get better at Halo.

[VerbotenDonkey]

I'm with Jam, I don't see not having battles every weekend as a solution. Personally, I WANT to battle every Sunday, I used to look forward to battles every week. Sunday was the best day of the week!

I mean, I'm all for trying it if everyone else wants to (although I work on opposite weekends so if the battles would be on my weekend to work I would never make them anymore lol) but I think pushing away what FC is isn't going to help. Lets be honest, FC is about those Sunday night battles.



Also, the answer to skill imbalances this vast should never be "git gud." If it's close matches between Squads, then yes, but sometimes the skill imbalance is so great and people have lives too.

[Barry Soap]

but I think pushing away what FC is isn't going to help. Lets be honest, FC is about those Sunday night battles

Isn't this just a way to say, "let's not change anything"?

[Jam Cliché]

Isn't this just a way to say, "let's not change anything"?
No, it's a way of saying, "let's not fix what isn't broken." That assumes that our event schedule isn't broken, of course, but that's the argument he's making.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[NervyDestroyer]

This was probably the most reasonable depiction of what's going on in FC with a reasonable change and timing I've seen in pretty much forever.

I might suggest an "Every other week" battle night instead, with the inbetweens alternating between a bye and a "lore" type event. Just a suggestion. Ultimately either course is pretty reasonable. People can argue all day about the why, but at the end of the day wars aren't being as fun as they were, and that much is true for almost everyone.


I'd guess most people aren't thinking that way. Most people don't want to crucify a bunch of people for skill. But the focus on competition has been creeping up on us a while, and it should still be addressed. People can only practice so much, and while yeah there will always be groups performing better, at some point there's a certain dispersion in skill that has to be addressed in a civil manner for everyone's benefit. It gets painted in a "burn them till they submit" type suggestion, but it's really not, it's just people wanting some sort of progressive measures to prevent exceptionalism, regardless of guessing the cause or motive. It's still an issue IMO, though the solution is obviously not a civil war of turning on eachother that's perceived.



Back to the suggestion, FC has to evolve. The majority of us aren't 16 year olds clamoring to get on every single Sunday because we have tons of free time and Halo is like the only decent multiplayer game option besides CoD. Judging Halo's population demographic, that won't change anytime soon. We all want wars to be fun, and frankly having less might make them more fun just by being less in our face. If we focus on the fun, the growth will come easily over time.

Having it every 2 weeks with a rotation is reasonable, but I wanted to have the "bye-week" to allow for these cool Halo 5 tournaments where people can compete to see who is the best in a true competitive atmosphere. Working the other way, I wanted to have those that want to enjoy the lighter side of gaming to enjoy themselves.


General concensus here is that wars aren't as fun, right? And that people get burned out by the time peacetime rolls around?
But what about what happens during peacetime? People are eager to get back to the war within a few weeks as well.

I don't think the schedule of battles is the issue here. That "burnout" is a product of baser issues that color player attitudes during the war. Interarmy differences, personal conflicts across army lines, malcontent attitudes towards leaders, balance-induced drops in motivation, etc. Perhaps we should be addressing those issues rather than throw more time between events?

If you extend the delay between battles, you lengthen the war even more, and those issues that hurt morale during war will still be there even during "bye" weeks. Then they will be there infecting members for twice or three times as long as they are now.

Because the issue is with the pressures and frustrations associated with Battlenight. That's what's causing these issues, it's a side effect. How long have we been looking for that "perfect solution" for "fixing" Battlenight or even the players. You're welcome to try, I've spent the last year looking for that solution. How much longer has others spent? With a decrease in pressure, this will inevitably lead to a decrease in frustration levels. The very frustration levels that lead to blaming others and getting angry and having meltdowns. This targets those levels of frustrations. In theory by decreasing the frustrations, the frequency of "incidents" decreases dramatically.

Note how I said "in theory." Only by taking the unsure leap can we see if this will work and only if people keep an open mind.


Everything you've said here I completely agree with. I pointed out in the War Council meeting that although there is a possibility of members getting better at Halo by playing a lot, they would require about 16 hours a week for a long time before they're maybe at the point of not getting whomped on Sunday. We all know that the people here absolutely do not have enough time for that, albeit that they actually want to get better at Halo.

That's ridiculous. This is why I want my solution to see the light. I still stand firmly that you must improve your skill as a squad in order to start winning, but that's... excessive. Perhaps with a longer hiatus, squads can focus on chemistry and togetherness rather than being together solely on their hate for Battlenight. No one gets better that way...



I posted before I read this, but I do think this is an objection that needs to be addressed. If the wars are going smoothly Nervy's plan is solid. When stuff isn't going very well, all we are doing with this system is delaying the inevitable and allowing more time for discontent to be spread.

Then it is one more solution we know won't work eh?

And yes I am taking the "MLG" approach because that's what competition is. Some are better than others. There's no other good solution other than you have to dedicate to getting better. Maybe if my solution works and numbers increases, we can implement that "tiering" system talked about in the past


I'm with Jam, I don't see not having battles every weekend as a solution. Personally, I WANT to battle every Sunday, I used to look forward to battles every week. Sunday was the best day of the week!

I mean, I'm all for trying it if everyone else wants to (although I work on opposite weekends so if the battles would be on my weekend to work I would never make them anymore lol) but I think pushing away what FC is isn't going to help. Lets be honest, FC is about those Sunday night battles.



Also, the answer to skill imbalances this vast should never be "git gud." If it's close matches between Squads, then yes, but sometimes the skill imbalance is so great and people have lives too.

This implies that we must "keep on going" a method that we've been using for the last... whole time I've been here. No, this isn't working anymore, I'm sorry.

I feel for you, I do. Vets remember fondly the days when there was Battlenight and everything was great. I don't believe it was as glamorous, but hey nostalgia is great and I do it too! However, it must be recognized that the methods of old do not work anymore. No longer can Sunday be the "best day." Now it's "Holy fucking shit time to do this bullshit than put it on repeat like broken record of getting my windpipe crushed by dem good kids."

Again still stand by my practice approach to skill imbalance because there is no other actual solution save removing people. There are ways to alleviate the frustrations associated with the pressures of this which is exactly what this solution targets. This solution adds variety. Having Battlenight every goddamn week is just growing stale. It's like Nascar except every left turn is a catastrophic crash. I can't remember the last time a Battlenight went smoothly.


I will make some edits at the bottom to fully flesh out many concerns brought to me when I get the time. Please remember that if we don't do something, we're just gonna keep slowly dying. I've spent the better part of my career in FC trying to come up with solutions and this is the only one I truly believe could work if an open mind is kept. It's not perfect and sacrifices will have to made. Not having Battlenight every Sunday is one such necessary sacrifice...

[Mythonian]

I'd need to see a detailed breakdown of what these lore events would actually be. They'd need to be thought-out well enough and of a scale that makes people interested in attending, as it'd be acting as an alternative to the Battle Night. It would also need to complement and interact with the wars in a meaningful way that's directly influenced by the members that attend.

I'm not outright opposed to something along these lines. I'm at the point where any pretenses and notions of "this shouldn't be changed" are being reconsidered, so I won't throw anything out without fully considering it.

Depending on the minutiae, this has potential benefits which could be worthwhile to pursue. The big hurdle for it to overcome would be offering an experience of a scale comparable to Battle Nights.

Also, as a few others have said, "bye weeks" seem unnecessary. Simply alternating BN/Lore weeks would most likely be plenty, at least during testing of the idea. If we end up having regular tournaments/events/contests, we could add in bye weeks for them on an as-needed basis.

EDIT: Should also say that I think this concept would fit best if used alongside other fixes. Stand-alone, this would have minimal effects. Combined with other changes in certain areas, the potential can be brought out more.

[purple gamer 17]

Finally. Lore. What I have been saying for years. That is when FC started to decline, when Lore was omitted.

[VerbotenDonkey]

This implies that we must "keep on going" a method that we've been using for the last... whole time I've been here. No, this isn't working anymore, I'm sorry.

I feel for you, I do. Vets remember fondly the days when there was Battlenight and everything was great. I don't believe it was as glamorous, but hey nostalgia is great and I do it too! However, it must be recognized that the methods of old do not work anymore. No longer can Sunday be the "best day." Now it's "Holy fucking shit time to do this bullshit than put it on repeat like broken record of getting my windpipe crushed by dem good kids."

Again still stand by my practice approach to skill imbalance because there is no other actual solution save removing people. There are ways to alleviate the frustrations associated with the pressures of this which is exactly what this solution targets. This solution adds variety. Having Battlenight every goddamn week is just growing stale. It's like Nascar except every left turn is a catastrophic crash. I can't remember the last time a Battlenight went smoothly.

If the battle nights aren't working, then having them every week or every other week wouldn't matter, people would STILL not be looking forward to them and the result would be the same. So it obviously isn't that it's every week and more in line with how the battles are performing. It isn't that people are overwhelmed with playing every week, it's more of the fact that there isn't anything to look forward to.

Also once forge releases, I'm more than willing to rework the LARP as long as there is still interest and the forge maps are actually good.

- - - Updated - - -


Isn't this just a way to say, "let's not change anything"?

No, this is just saying that I don't agree we are looking at the right angle of changing things.

[Jam Cliché]

Also once forge releases, I'm more than willing to rework the LARP as long as there is still interest and the forge maps are actually good.

What if we could rebuild the "Lore" to be an actual function of our events? By that I mean, we take the results of battles, the state of the warmap, and the existing army units, and have a weekly publication that details these things in story form? Didn't Myth start that once? The newspaper reporter Jonathan Craig?

If we continue to look at Lore as an optional and separate deal from battles, then it's never going to mean anything. If we can't present a cohesive story that actually has something to do with the battles we fight, then Lore will never be a factor that helps distinguish us from other communities.

[Nicholas Sapien]

What if we could rebuild the "Lore" to be an actual function of our events? By that I mean, we take the results of battles, the state of the warmap, and the existing army units, and have a weekly publication that details these things in story form? Didn't Myth start that once? The newspaper reporter Jonathan Craig?

If we continue to look at Lore as an optional and separate deal from battles, then it's never going to mean anything. If we can't present a cohesive story that actually has something to do with the battles we fight, then Lore will never be a factor that helps distinguish us from other communities.

I always liked reading those reports

[CrazyKiller4561]

I think this is a great idea, but I'm more for 2 weeks as opposed to three (7 days might not be a lot but 21 is over half a month lol). I did actually quote your Skype message about this in the WC meeting but it may have been overlooked. However, this is a solution worthy of discussion, especially given the recent update. Thanks for putting the thread together, Nervy. :D

I like the idea this thread presents, and also agree 3 weeks may be a little to much. Because not many people were around for the war that lasted over a year. Might I add it also lasted over a year with the 1 week system.

[NervyDestroyer]

No, it's a way of saying, "let's not fix what isn't broken." That assumes that our event schedule isn't broken, of course, but that's the argument he's making.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Incorrect. I'm saying the schedule of having Battlenight every week is both stressful and stale. My solution is intended to alleviate stress while adding fresh variety. Clearly this is a problem, as evidenced by the stress-induced meltdowns that happen all the time. This is a fix for that.

So no that's not the argument. It's not superficial like that...


I'd need to see a detailed breakdown of what these lore events would actually be. They'd need to be thought-out well enough and of a scale that makes people interested in attending, as it'd be acting as an alternative to the Battle Night. It would also need to complement and interact with the wars in a meaningful way that's directly influenced by the members that attend.

I'm not outright opposed to something along these lines. I'm at the point where any pretenses and notions of "this shouldn't be changed" are being reconsidered, so I won't throw anything out without fully considering it.

Depending on the minutiae, this has potential benefits which could be worthwhile to pursue. The big hurdle for it to overcome would be offering an experience of a scale comparable to Battle Nights.

Also, as a few others have said, "bye weeks" seem unnecessary. Simply alternating BN/Lore weeks would most likely be plenty, at least during testing of the idea. If we end up having regular tournaments/events/contests, we could add in bye weeks for them on an as-needed basis.

EDIT: Should also say that I think this concept would fit best if used alongside other fixes. Stand-alone, this would have minimal effects. Combined with other changes in certain areas, the potential can be brought out more.

I don't have lore based events in mind currently. I have some ideas, but I would like to talk with the current War Council to brainstorm and talk with vets if that's possible. I want the lore event to capture the lore of the community in the purest form.

I still believe it should be 3 weeks because of the potential that the "bye-week" could have in terms of community events. Lots disagree and that's fine, but I still feel it should be 3 weeks...

I think this solution has more potential than you say in your edit, but combining changes with this change can bring it to its full potential anyway so it's a moot argument on my part :)


If the battle nights aren't working, then having them every week or every other week wouldn't matter, people would STILL not be looking forward to them and the result would be the same. So it obviously isn't that it's every week and more in line with how the battles are performing. It isn't that people are overwhelmed with playing every week, it's more of the fact that there isn't anything to look forward to.

Also once forge releases, I'm more than willing to rework the LARP as long as there is still interest and the forge maps are actually good.


I disagree. I've noticed with the non-stop work and time I've done for the past year and a half for FC, I can say without a doubt that most of the issues that arise each Battlenight are stress related. Targeting that stress directly will reduce frustration which would cause FC to have a much more beneficial environment. Remove the stress, remove most of the frustration.

This also gives a 2 week period if there is a botched Battlenight which I doubt would happen to the levels we have now. Nonetheless, it would be easier to find solutions with more time anyway so it's a double whammy there.


What if we could rebuild the "Lore" to be an actual function of our events? By that I mean, we take the results of battles, the state of the warmap, and the existing army units, and have a weekly publication that details these things in story form? Didn't Myth start that once? The newspaper reporter Jonathan Craig?

If we continue to look at Lore as an optional and separate deal from battles, then it's never going to mean anything. If we can't present a cohesive story that actually has something to do with the battles we fight, then Lore will never be a factor that helps distinguish us from other communities.


This solution intended to give people more time which leads to less stress as well as provide the variety to keep this place fresh. What you're proposing is what I've attempted to do which is shoehorn variety into an already severely limiting frame of time... This would cause more problems not less...

Lore isn't separate and optional nor did I say that. It's very much a part of the warsim as Battlenight is. The lore and Battlenight are NOT the same thing. Battlenight is a competitive event, lore isn't competitive, it's role-play. Very different...

I would like to see the lore-based week have an effect on the warmap also which makes it meaningful. It would have to be done in a way that is fun while creating a little tension with the WARMAP on the line

Please do not add more stuff into this limiting frame of time. It won't work and will be a waste of time. My Administration and I drew up an entire "Renegade Games" weekly event to try to add variety. That on top of Battlenight was waaaay too much to even manage let alone expect enlisted to show up to all that and Battlenight. Give people some more time fpr role-play, it's not unreasonable....

[NervyDestroyer]

Made a few edits to the original post

[Houdini]

One other thing that I think is worth mentioning is the logic behind how distributing activity reduces stress.

I'm not entirely convinced that having a battle night every two weeks is any less stressful than a battle night every week. Nervy, if you have some sort of example of how delaying a stressful event makes it less stressful I could use some elaboration. I'm not really following the logic of how less frequent battle nights makes the battle nights less stressful.

I'm looking at this from the perspective that if I have a homework assignment due every week vs. a homework assignment due every two weeks. The frequency of the homework assignments doesn't really impact the stress. If anything, I simply have a week of no stress when I don't have to deal with the assignment followed by a week of stress as usual.

I primarily like this plan because it means I don't have to worry about showing up every week for battle nights especially since my schedule is in general super busy. I don't really see how the stress is reduced by waiting a few more days between the battle nights.

[VerbotenDonkey]

I'm not entirely convinced that having a battle night every two weeks is any less stressful than a battle night every week. Nervy, if you have some sort of example of how delaying a stressful event makes it less stressful I could use some elaboration. I'm not really following the logic of how less frequent battle nights makes the battle nights less stressful.


This. If anything, the Thanksgiving break actually made me lose focus from FC because it was too much time away from it and it was boring. xD

[Wolf Demon Lee]

While I think focusing on BN like it's FC's only thing to do is bad, I don't really agree with the system. Regardless of its original or true purpose, it seems like trying to promote activity by promoting and accommodating laziness. Which is counter-intuitive. I also think many of these problems stem from political issues and general inactivity, and that this new system would be used to distract new and current members from the issues at hand that need addressing.

I think an easier and less resource-demanding solution is to make squads work better. It seems like most of the real complaints about BN are from squads who do not perform well and lack real team comp, and are rightly so frustrated.

Play games together.
Doesn't really matter if they're FC maps or gametypes, at least not yet. Pick a date, commit to it. Nobody was ever just handed a reward for existing. You have to work for your goals. Even if that goal is to play better or spank another group at a game.

Same strategy of playing together will even cause you to form better strategies. It'll improve your communication skills with one another. Your own skill will improve simply because of use. Improve together and you'll learn about how well your comp is.

Good squads are good because they work hard at it. Making a system like this also doesn't make their schedules change. Every BN, they're going to be just as awesome and unstoppable as they are now. In fact, you're really just giving them more time to prepare.

tl;dr Making even a small commitment to improving yourself will have a huge impact on your gameplay and the gameplay of those around you. It'll make BN funner because you can't wait to trash the other team, because you've been practicing. A little competitiveness never killed anyone.

Except gladiators. Competition between gladiators typically resulted in gory megadeath.
...Good thing we aren't gladiators, right?

[Jam Cliché]

Incorrect.

The fuck? I wasn't speaking for you, I was speaking for Verboten. How are you gonna tell me if I'm correct or incorrect in my interpretation of something you didn't say?


Clearly this is a problem, as evidenced by the stress-induced meltdowns that happen all the time.

...

I disagree. I've noticed with the non-stop work and time I've done for the past year and a half for FC, I can say without a doubt that most of the issues that arise each Battlenight are stress related. Targeting that stress directly will reduce frustration which would cause FC to have a much more beneficial environment. Remove the stress, remove most of the frustration.
You're suggesting that the schedule of battles is the only factor that contributes to the community frustration? What about unfair levels of challenge, lack of rewards, communication barriers between fellow members and leaders, diminished variety of experience, malcontent with peers, and outside stressors?

You can have periods of "no time!" or "all the time in the world!", but your experiences or lack of experiences within those periods are what will or won't cause stress. And who is having the meltdowns here? If you have allowed FC to have such extreme effect on you that you will suffer any form of mental collapse or feeling of loss of control, please seek help immediately. "Real Life First" has always been one of FC's most common tenants, and we encourage all of our members to take time off when commitment to the community interferes with responsibilities elsewhere.


What you're proposing is what I've attempted to do which is shoehorn variety into an already severely limiting frame of time... This would cause more problems not less...
Eh? I didn't make any proposal that dealt with stretching the current FC schedule any thinner. I said that our existing pool of official events should themselves be what shape the FC Lore. The only thing close to concrete that I made in that post you're quoting was to bring back the Jonathan Craig publications, and only one person was needed to publish those.


Lore isn't separate and optional nor did I say that. It's very much a part of the warsim as Battlenight is. The lore and Battlenight are NOT the same thing. Battlenight is a competitive event, lore isn't competitive, it's role-play. Very different...
You're stating an opinion as fact here, and I disagree with that opinion - I don't think Lore is strictly role-play. Take for instance the format of some of the wars of yesteryear, in older titles like Halo 3 and Reach. Attack plans were not divvied up into a pair of movements. Entire regiments of troops were moved from map to map, ultimately converging on the locations that would be played each battle, and the results formed a narrative that played out over the course of the war. Lore was and can still easily be an intrinsic part of our events.


I would like to see the lore-based week have an effect on the warmap also which makes it meaningful. It would have to be done in a way that is fun while creating a little tension with the WARMAP on the line
Even if this suggestion actually had some substance in it, why put up a week of downtime between two alternating events like that? How bored do you want me to be that you would limit me to playing FC-style Halo on only one night each month?


Please do not add more stuff into this limiting frame of time.
I'm not adding stuff, you're adding stuff. You put words in my mouth in nearly every post of mine you've quoted, and I don't appreciate that. You make it look like we're arguing over certain ideas that I did not present or support, and that's extremely self-serving.

[tron]

While I think focusing on BN like it's FC's only thing to do is bad, I don't really agree with the system. Regardless of its original or true purpose, it seems like trying to promote activity by promoting and accommodating laziness. Which is counter-intuitive. I also think many of these problems stem from political issues and general inactivity, and that this new system would be used to distract new and current members from the issues at hand that need addressing.

I think an easier and less resource-demanding solution is to make squads work better. It seems like most of the real complaints about BN are from squads who do not perform well and lack real team comp, and are rightly so frustrated.

Play games together.
Doesn't really matter if they're FC maps or gametypes, at least not yet. Pick a date, commit to it. Nobody was ever just handed a reward for existing. You have to work for your goals. Even if that goal is to play better or spank another group at a game.

Same strategy of playing together will even cause you to form better strategies. It'll improve your communication skills with one another. Your own skill will improve simply because of use. Improve together and you'll learn about how well your comp is.

Good squads are good because they work hard at it. Making a system like this also doesn't make their schedules change. Every BN, they're going to be just as awesome and unstoppable as they are now. In fact, you're really just giving them more time to prepare.

tl;dr Making even a small commitment to improving yourself will have a huge impact on your gameplay and the gameplay of those around you. It'll make BN funner because you can't wait to trash the other team, because you've been practicing. A little competitiveness never killed anyone.

Except gladiators. Competition between gladiators typically resulted in gory megadeath.
...Good thing we aren't gladiators, right?

I agree with this post. No one even turned up to practice last night, in fact I'm not sure if we even have a dedicated weekly team practice night anymore.

I really enjoyed the battle nights on Halo 4. If we need to try and change things, I'm all for changing the frequency of battle nights, however I would suggest 1 every 3 weeks is too infrequent.

Look, why don't Redd army put together their own super squad to fight "that pesky Blue one"? Without naming names, we have some high skilled players too. It could be a temporary squad if necessary, put them together to fight vbd then they could go back to regular squads for the rest of the war. If vbd are unbeatable by a mixed skill squad (which seems to be the case) then perhaps battle nights need a separate one off game for the uber squads?

My problem is: I don't like losing, no one does. But as someone mentioned, even games where you end up losing can be super fun and hard fought. What I find less agreeable is waiting around, when I'm unsure if there's even going to be another battle andr if my presence is still required. Remember that in the UK, were up at 12-1 in the morning at this point and some of us have to be up for work the next day. I would like to underline that I don't mind doing it if we are actually waiting for another game, but otherwise it's slightly annoying.

[Barry Soap]

I agree with this post. No one even turned up to practice last night, in fact I'm not sure if we even have a dedicated weekly team practice night anymore.

I really enjoyed the battle nights on Halo 4. If we need to try and change things, I'm all for changing the frequency of battle nights, however I would suggest 1 every 3 weeks is too infrequent.

Look, why don't Redd army put together their own super squad to fight "that pesky Blue one"? Without naming names, we have some high skilled players too. It could be a temporary squad if necessary, put them together to fight vbd then they could go back to regular squads for the rest of the war. If vbd are unbeatable by a mixed skill squad (which seems to be the case) then perhaps battle nights need a separate one off game for the uber squads?

My problem is: I don't like losing, no one does. But as someone mentioned, even games where you end up losing can be super fun and hard fought. What I find less agreeable is waiting around, when I'm unsure if there's even going to be another battle andr if my presence is still required. Remember that in the UK, were up at 12-1 in the morning at this point and some of us have to be up for work the next day. I would like to underline that I don't mind doing it if we are actually waiting for another game, but otherwise it's slightly annoying.

In the past there were multiple squads capable of playing/winning against VbD such as Sparta, Legacy, Vanquish, Resistance, etc. but unfortunately competitive squads seem to last a shorter time than casual squads, hence why REDD army is comprised mainly of casual squads at this time.

I suggest putting an event which is beneficial to FC in between the two battle nights - maybe an optional recruitment event maybe? If we have a scheduled time slot for such an event, it may motivate people to actually play, talk and recruit. I personally would be willing to come to such an event, and I reckon we could get a good 10-20 recruits in one day if we really try as a community.

Also, I think the intended purpose of a two week slot is to let people cool off from battle night. I've noticed the people that misunderstand the stress of battle nights as of late have infrequent attendance (which isn't a problem, it just might skew your view of the community in it's current state). Yes, I know FC has probably been in worse spots, but I doubt it's had a problem similar to this one, as the current issue doesn't have any solution as of yet.

However, to reiterate and emphasise, place a beneficial event to the community in between the two battle nights. The pros I can see:

Recruits as well as members get a chance to meet and talk with members of another squad.
Provides a less competitive side to FC - which recruits might want to see.
Brings in a good batch of recruits, which is beneficial in multiple ways.
Members have the chance to ask more experienced players about how to get better at Halo (if that's the route we're taking).


Cons:

Possible lack of attendance.

[NervyDestroyer]

One other thing that I think is worth mentioning is the logic behind how distributing activity reduces stress.

I'm not entirely convinced that having a battle night every two weeks is any less stressful than a battle night every week. Nervy, if you have some sort of example of how delaying a stressful event makes it less stressful I could use some elaboration. I'm not really following the logic of how less frequent battle nights makes the battle nights less stressful.

I'm looking at this from the perspective that if I have a homework assignment due every week vs. a homework assignment due every two weeks. The frequency of the homework assignments doesn't really impact the stress. If anything, I simply have a week of no stress when I don't have to deal with the assignment followed by a week of stress as usual.

I primarily like this plan because it means I don't have to worry about showing up every week for battle nights especially since my schedule is in general super busy. I don't really see how the stress is reduced by waiting a few more days between the battle nights.

The issue I see is that a big part of why I think the warsim aspect got sidelined is because everyone here only has 7 days in a week. 1 of those days if for scrims, 1-2 days for practice if you want to stand a chance, and then 1 day for Battlenight plus the 5 days a week you are working or at school which takes up a lot of the time of those days. So about 3.5/7 days is for FC and wait to also stand a chance you need to do Matchmaking with your squad and dedicate time for that. Practice isn't enough so you perhaps dedicate a day to that. so that's 4.5/7 days which you must prepare for Battlenight for in order to compete at the level expected. It's a lot. First war of MCC and the last war of Halo 4 were very demanding from my perspective.

That's sort of the basis where I can think to target frustrations... It doesn't fix everything, it's targeted toward some negatives I see going on.


While I think focusing on BN like it's FC's only thing to do is bad, I don't really agree with the system. Regardless of its original or true purpose, it seems like trying to promote activity by promoting and accommodating laziness. Which is counter-intuitive. I also think many of these problems stem from political issues and general inactivity, and that this new system would be used to distract new and current members from the issues at hand that need addressing.

I think an easier and less resource-demanding solution is to make squads work better. It seems like most of the real complaints about BN are from squads who do not perform well and lack real team comp, and are rightly so frustrated.

Play games together.
Doesn't really matter if they're FC maps or gametypes, at least not yet. Pick a date, commit to it. Nobody was ever just handed a reward for existing. You have to work for your goals. Even if that goal is to play better or spank another group at a game.

Same strategy of playing together will even cause you to form better strategies. It'll improve your communication skills with one another. Your own skill will improve simply because of use. Improve together and you'll learn about how well your comp is.

Good squads are good because they work hard at it. Making a system like this also doesn't make their schedules change. Every BN, they're going to be just as awesome and unstoppable as they are now. In fact, you're really just giving them more time to prepare.

tl;dr Making even a small commitment to improving yourself will have a huge impact on your gameplay and the gameplay of those around you. It'll make BN funner because you can't wait to trash the other team, because you've been practicing. A little competitiveness never killed anyone.

Except gladiators. Competition between gladiators typically resulted in gory megadeath.
...Good thing we aren't gladiators, right?

Don't understand how it encourages laziness, there's still shit going on, just not all the time... That's not laziness, laziness is refusing to do anything which if a leader is being lazy they usually fail. This doesn't change that.

I agree that you must practice and play together to get better, but that's not like an overnight thing. I wish to give people a chance come Battlenight. I want squads to practice and play together more.


The fuck? I wasn't speaking for you, I was speaking for Verboten. How are you gonna tell me if I'm correct or incorrect in my interpretation of something you didn't say?


You're suggesting that the schedule of battles is the only factor that contributes to the community frustration? What about unfair levels of challenge, lack of rewards, communication barriers between fellow members and leaders, diminished variety of experience, malcontent with peers, and outside stressors?

You can have periods of "no time!" or "all the time in the world!", but your experiences or lack of experiences within those periods are what will or won't cause stress. And who is having the meltdowns here? If you have allowed FC to have such extreme effect on you that you will suffer any form of mental collapse or feeling of loss of control, please seek help immediately. "Real Life First" has always been one of FC's most common tenants, and we encourage all of our members to take time off when commitment to the community interferes with responsibilities elsewhere.


Eh? I didn't make any proposal that dealt with stretching the current FC schedule any thinner. I said that our existing pool of official events should themselves be what shape the FC Lore. The only thing close to concrete that I made in that post you're quoting was to bring back the Jonathan Craig publications, and only one person was needed to publish those.


You're stating an opinion as fact here, and I disagree with that opinion - I don't think Lore is strictly role-play. Take for instance the format of some of the wars of yesteryear, in older titles like Halo 3 and Reach. Attack plans were not divvied up into a pair of movements. Entire regiments of troops were moved from map to map, ultimately converging on the locations that would be played each battle, and the results formed a narrative that played out over the course of the war. Lore was and can still easily be an intrinsic part of our events.


Even if this suggestion actually had some substance in it, why put up a week of downtime between two alternating events like that? How bored do you want me to be that you would limit me to playing FC-style Halo on only one night each month?


I'm not adding stuff, you're adding stuff. You put words in my mouth in nearly every post of mine you've quoted, and I don't appreciate that. You make it look like we're arguing over certain ideas that I did not present or support, and that's extremely self-serving.

I thought you were making an assumption about what I said? I don't know why you had to get all fired up and ragey about it when you could have said that without treating me like shit...

The unfair levels of challenge can't be fixed successfully without removing people, this solution adds the variety you were talking about. Reviving the warsim will hopefully bring the concepts FC was founded on with army play back. I think I see where you're coming from with lack of rewards though and maybe some individual based achievements for Battlenight and the warsim. Whether or not this solution is accepted, those should still be a thing regardless. Communication barriers I don't particularly see? Could you elaborate? Malcontent would ideally be reduced by lowering stress levels. Outside stressors can never be solved with a simple solution, they are always different and will always be here regardless of whatever solution is made. You're definitely correct there and I see your point. I'm sorry I didn't mean to be that suggestive because you're right, it's not the only problem, but I do believe it's a problem regardless.

You're absolutely right here, it won't magically fix a bad experience on Battlenight or even if there's a bad experience during the warsim week no matter how much time is given. I'm trying to increase the bullshit tolerance by reducing stress which would ideally reduce the radioactive meltdowns that happen and the angry mini-rants. Hopefully with the reduced stress, everyone will stop blaming each other all the time and actually start working toward even more productive solutions. I wouldn't want people to get overly stressed and see the hospital like you said which is why I want to make a more productive environment to avoid that.

I may have misunderstood what you were saying and for that I apologize. I get why you would be mad, but it was honestly just a bad interpretation...

That's fair, maybe I shouldn't have forced that so brashly. I feel that Battlenight and the warsim have grown apart which I'm upset at. I want it back and this is the best method I can think of that would have it come back more meaningfully. Maybe it will leak over into the wars, maybe it won't either way, I want it back meaningfully which can't be done with Battlenight currently that would transition smoothly... That was a badly worded comment on my part and I redact it because you're correct...

Why are you saying my suggestion had no substance? Did I not provide clear reasoning for everything I put? That was pretty out there and just simply not true. It has a lot of substance you just disagree with it which is fine... Battlenight is stressful and there's no variety, same shit every week. That's gets stale and old. I want to change up the way events are scheduled as a ways to bring back the warsim that made FC special for a lot of people, reduce the stress of Battlenight by not having it all the time, and allow for squads to gain more chemistry with each other in a more robust way. This allows flexibility for that to happen.

Again, the result of the misinterpretation. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth or be opportunistic. It was literally just a misinterpretation which is a mistake on my part... I'll read back through your comment with that in mind and make an edit on this post...

[Houdini]

It'll make BN funner because you can't wait to trash the other team, because you've been practicing. A little competitiveness never killed anyone.

I strongly disagree with the idea that trashing another team is fun. I personally hate being on either side of a lopsided game. When my squad is dominating I usually just drop the control and go do something else because the game is so boring.

[Houdini]

Look, why don't Redd army put together their own super squad to fight "that pesky Blue one"? Without naming names, we have some high skilled players too. It could be a temporary squad if necessary, put them together to fight vbd then they could go back to regular squads for the rest of the war. If vbd are unbeatable by a mixed skill squad (which seems to be the case) then perhaps battle nights need a separate one off game for the uber squads?

At least in my experience the idea of building a stacked team within either army is usually very frowned upon. I think a culture like this where both armies strategically arrange players in squads would be very interesting, but would also have repercussions of making the players not selected for this super squad feel left out.

This type of solution is most definitely a choice of vision for the community. Do we want a community that is more closely aligned with absolute competition? I honestly don't know, but I do think we need a unified vision for what the community represents and should be. Right now, I feel like FC is being led by a multitude of ideas and all of those ideas cannot exist in harmony, thus the conflict.

- - - Updated - - -


I suggest putting an event which is beneficial to FC in between the two battle nights - maybe an optional recruitment event maybe? If we have a scheduled time slot for such an event, it may motivate people to actually play, talk and recruit. I personally would be willing to come to such an event, and I reckon we could get a good 10-20 recruits in one day if we really try as a community.

As a community I don't think we have ever really had an issue getting recruits. The primary issue is in retention. Even during MCC we had something like 60+ people enlisting in the armies, but almost all of them showed up to a single battle night (or less) and disappeared.

[Jam Cliché]

I thought you were making an assumption about what I said? I don't know why you had to get all fired up and ragey about it when you could have said that without treating me like shit...
Once again, putting words (or emotions, I guess?) in my mouth. I am not fired up, ragey, or trying to offend you. I just don't like someone changing what I am saying to fit their agenda.


The unfair levels of challenge can't be fixed successfully without removing people, this solution adds the variety you were talking about. Reviving the warsim will hopefully bring the concepts FC was founded on with army play back. I think I see where you're coming from with lack of rewards though and maybe some individual based achievements for Battlenight and the warsim. Whether or not this solution is accepted, those should still be a thing regardless. Communication barriers I don't particularly see? Could you elaborate? Malcontent would ideally be reduced by lowering stress levels. Outside stressors can never be solved with a simple solution, they are always different and will always be here regardless of whatever solution is made. You're definitely correct there and I see your point. I'm sorry I didn't mean to be that suggestive because you're right, it's not the only problem, but I do believe it's a problem regardless.
This is a series of individual responses to a list of factors I presented about stress, right? If so, I think you drastically misinterpreted me. You're responding as though I cited those things as effects, I was citing them as causes. You claimed that the time crunch was the main cause of stress and frustration. I presented that list as a counterpoint saying that they are the cause, not the time crunch.


You're absolutely right here, it won't magically fix a bad experience on Battlenight or even if there's a bad experience during the warsim week no matter how much time is given. I'm trying to increase the bullshit tolerance by reducing stress which would ideally reduce the radioactive meltdowns that happen and the angry mini-rants. Hopefully with the reduced stress, everyone will stop blaming each other all the time and actually start working toward even more productive solutions. I wouldn't want people to get overly stressed and see the hospital like you said which is why I want to make a more productive environment to avoid that.
Here you also misinterpreted me. I am not accusing your suggestion of failing to solve the problem of bad experiences during battles. I am saying that you're aiming at a completely wrong target. My point in this whole conversation has been that time, by itself, is not a cause of stress. I am saying that the density of good or bad experiences within a given timeframe is what will or won't cause stress. You also talked again about "meltdowns," and missed the point of my reply again. In that statement, I said that if anyone experiences one of these episodes, they need to seek assistance outside this community. Nothing you do with the schedule of events is going to help somebody who compulsively overcommits.


I may have misunderstood what you were saying and for that I apologize. I get why you would be mad, but it was honestly just a bad interpretation...
I am not angry, so please don't think I am. Misunderstandings happen.


That's fair, maybe I shouldn't have forced that so brashly. I feel that Battlenight and the warsim have grown apart which I'm upset at. I want it back and this is the best method I can think of that would have it come back more meaningfully. Maybe it will leak over into the wars, maybe it won't either way, I want it back meaningfully which can't be done with Battlenight currently that would transition smoothly... That was a badly worded comment on my part and I redact it because you're correct...
I think you and I can both agree on the fact that the battles and the FC canon have grown apart. But I don't see how artificially extending the wars with these "breaks" is going to fix that. Inserting a "lore event" I can almost understand, but as I said, I feel that doing so would be admitting that FC's battle night and RP-related activities exist in different universes, and we don't want that. We should find some way to have lore exist as a dependent function of our events.


Why are you saying my suggestion had no substance? Did I not provide clear reasoning for everything I put? That was pretty out there and just simply not true. It has a lot of substance you just disagree with it which is fine... Battlenight is stressful and there's no variety, same shit every week. That's gets stale and old. I want to change up the way events are scheduled as a ways to bring back the warsim that made FC special for a lot of people, reduce the stress of Battlenight by not having it all the time, and allow for squads to gain more chemistry with each other in a more robust way. This allows flexibility for that to happen.
Not referring to your entire suggestion from your original post. I was referring to the vague description of a "lore based event" and the use of descriptors like "meaningful." In any case, my question still stands: even if you can justify and create a separate event that is deemed equally important as battles, why would you put a break week in between them? Wouldn't one event simply serve as a break from the other as they alternate?


Again, the result of the misinterpretation. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth or be opportunistic. It was literally just a misinterpretation which is a mistake on my part... I'll read back through your comment with that in mind and make an edit on this post...
I appreciate that, and likewise I've done my best to clarify any of my previous points in my response here.

[NervyDestroyer]

This type of solution is most definitely a choice of vision for the community. Do we want a community that is more closely aligned with absolute competition? I honestly don't know, but I do think we need a unified vision for what the community represents and should be. Right now, I feel like FC is being led by a multitude of ideas and all of those ideas cannot exist in harmony, thus the conflict.


This is also really interesting and is another possible thing... not really solution, but thing. It's not popular, but would be weird actually. How would that even work? Alright I'm not suggesting we go MLG, but still pretty damn intriguing to think about

[Houdini]

This is also really interesting and is another possible thing... not really solution, but thing. It's not popular, but would be weird actually. How would that even work? Alright I'm not suggesting we go MLG, but still pretty damn intriguing to think about

This was my reaction exactly when I first read tron's suggestion.

[JamiDJ]

This was my reaction exactly when I first read tron's suggestion.

FC needs a mission statement. What is it we promote here 1st and foremost above all others?

[Houdini]

FC needs a mission statement. What is it we promote here 1st and foremost above all others?

This should probably be branched off into another thread. I feel like this discussion will get very heated very quickly and de-rail Nervy's original suggestion.

[Jam Cliché]

FC needs a mission statement. What is it we promote here 1st and foremost above all others?

That's simple. Respect and Fun.

[JamiDJ]

That's simple. Respect and Fun.

Great Start to what could be a great mission statement. What would follow? What would be the first message new people see and understand when they visit FC?

- - - Updated - - -


This should probably be branched off into another thread. I feel like this discussion will get very heated very quickly and de-rail Nervy's original suggestion.

Very true, lets start a new thread on this one. sorry didnt mean to derail the discussion

[NervyDestroyer]

This should probably be branched off into another thread. I feel like this discussion will get very heated very quickly and de-rail Nervy's original suggestion.

Thanks Houdini.

That would be preferable if things are kept relevant

[Jam Cliché]

Great Start to what could be a great mission statement. What would follow? What would be the first message new people see and understand when they visit FC?
It's the opening of the Accords xD

[JamiDJ]

It's the opening of the Accords xD

http://fcwars.net/forums/showthread.php?15612-FC-Mission-Statement

[Barry Soap]

As a community I don't think we have ever really had an issue getting recruits. The primary issue is in retention. Even during MCC we had something like 60+ people enlisting in the armies, but almost all of them showed up to a single battle night (or less) and disappeared.

That's fair. We have issues with retention, but it's hard to fix when the members here have such demanding schedules. But you've probably noticed that the enlistment offices have been dead recently, so I think a bit of recruiting is in order. Also, if people stick around even after being ignored or not being able to play with anyone, they may turn out to be great members and maybe even leaders, no?

[Houdini]

That's fair. We have issues with retention, but it's hard to fix when the members here have such demanding schedules. But you've probably noticed that the enlistment offices have been dead recently, so I think a bit of recruiting is in order. Also, if people stick around even after being ignored or not being able to play with anyone, they may turn out to be great members and maybe even leaders, no?

Yeah the people who stick around can be great people. But the people we lose could also be great leaders.

[Jam Cliché]

Why are we trying to make hypothetical leaders out of people who aren't here anymore? Recruit responsible leaders and loyal members from the getgo and stop trying to mold people if they don't show any commitment to begin with. This is why we can't cater to everyone, because we have to be honest about the fact that FC isn't for everyone, and we don't have the resources to mold every stray Halo player into an Officer.

Not only must we figure out how to restore our community, we're also gonna have to accept that we'll need to turn people away to keep it in good shape.

[Barry Soap]

Yeah the people who stick around can be great people. But the people we lose could also be great leaders.

But that's how recruiting works unfortunately and there's no easy fix; people will stay and people will leave. We'd need members with exceedingly open schedules to be able to contact and play with recruits often.

[NervyDestroyer]

But that's how recruiting works unfortunately and there's no easy fix; people will stay and people will leave. We'd need members with exceedingly open schedules to be able to contact and play with recruits often.

Pretty much this actually. The suggestion I made would hopefully put less strain on someone's schedule so someone with leadership potential could actually contribute meaningfully to the community in some way.

I look forward to seeing what other changes can be combined with this one as Mythonian said earlier because the more I think about it, this would be great to implement with other effective solutions