Battle area > Community
Double Teaming
Pcdroid:
@Hope
Finally someone with a well structured argument. Props to you for that.
Now for the issue at hand:
"Let me start with the main point, people respond to incentives."
I completely agree with you on that one and that is the reason why i think double teaming is a bad idea which brings me to my next point.
"Of course, an outright ban has no incentives for both members and leaders unless they support it."
"Double Teaming is NOT killing the "community," we are pointing our fingers at an issue that would not be a problem should we have a larger player base."
I put these two points together because this actually answers both of them. Indeed double teaming does not kill the community, it does however restrict it in more ways than one, because of double teaming this community restricts itself into its current player base and it gives 0 incentives for leaders to try and get new people into the team battling scene. Banning double teaming will actually give leaders incentive to go to the starting area and look for new members to recruit. Limiting each person to one team will open the way for new players to come to the Team System and be introduced into the forum and the area community. The double teaming system, as it is right now, gives 0 incentives for leaders to actually look for new members and introduce them to the community, its not only about the system being attractive enough to make them stay, because to make people stay in the community, we have to get them in in the first place, and double teaming does not help with that. That outright ban is the thing thats gonna give people incentives to make their teams grow with new blood and rejuvenate the team system to a certain extent.
"The best solution to this is not going for a ban that forces people to act. People respond to incentives. Its not a big bang word with blurred lines and meanings like "bonds," and not any sort of vague assumption on why and what we do in teams. We are people, and we have individuality. This is apparent by how everyone brings in personal testimony more than anything else. Its all different, and in no way are any of them wrong. Trying to find a point of convergence and agreement from there just isn't going to happen."
Banning is a possible solution.
If you want facts I might as well give some to you.
RT is the longest standing team on area, constantly active and team battles constantly, and by far the least drama inducing, no reworks,reforms name changes etc since its creation. Also has a lot of different active members each time. Why? this team is doing something right which is having multi teaming and subbing banned(also the only team who actually tries to recruit randoms on area).
Every team on area is constantly reforming, reworking,changing names, disbanding and regrouping again, now tell me, does that look like a healthy system to you? because to me it certainly isn't. Reforming a system takes actions, talking about a ban being idealistic and not even practical without even trying to apply it or change the system in some way does not solve anything, we have to at least try it and see how it works out, nothing comes without effort and I'm willing to support the effort these voters put to make a healthier team system and a more moral one to boot.
"We have to attract new members and encourage new members into entering our team battling scene. Now understand that not everyone is constantly involved in this. We have players who slip in and out, those who only see this as an occasional activity to unwind and play Vanguard. Whatever the case may be, we just need more people."
"Give incentives for people and make them want to stay. That way we have a larger environment as a whole. With a growing environment, we can get an exponentially growing community once again as we did before."
To attract new members we have to make the effort to do so, People have to actually try and recruit members from "randoms" and give new people a chance. Do you know why people don't do that? Simply because multi teaming is easier, and you just allow it. It's hard to give people incentives when you just gave them the easy option to go for. Sometimes restricting peoples options actually drives people to the right direction, which is why laws exist. You have to get leaders to put effort into gathering members for their teams, to be able to consistently team battle and have fun, to give chances to the new players on area who love to play the game as much as we do.
NubKnightZ:
1. Restrict team count to an upper limit. A team with 30 members not only kills competition (due to lack of opponents to play) but when combined with multi-teaming ruins team identity as a whole. (If 75% of two teams are exactly the same, there's really no difference in the two and is pointless. If anything, it can be abused for win-loss ratios by posting wins for 1 and losses on the other to keep records "clean".)
2. Allow substitutes for low count teams only. If your team only has X amount of players and thus probably won't be able to constantly play, then yes, substitutes will be required. If your team has like 10 people and you can't get 3 to be around reliably, then you should reconsider who deserves to be a team member.
3. Allow "double-team-playable"; as in a player may play for two teams. (This brings a bit of lenience to those who really have gotten attached to more than 1 team over time; do not abuse this to make sister teams that are pretty much the same roster.) However, this does not mean that you can't be allowed to be in multiple team chats for those afraid of losing contact with friends. That's up to the teams to decide. You'll still get 90% of the experience just by being in the chat and being active there. You can watch, you can coach, give tips and advice. You just can't play for them.
4. Repost: Enforce honest records. Post-TB, both teams should report within 5 minutes and it's on both teams to confirm the results are correct in both threads. No skewed false win-rates.
5. Repost: As mentioned prior and by other people, encourage people to go out and look for newer players to join. There's little to no attempt to widen the community when some identify the issue of the community dying.
[R.T] SpiderHunterMD:
You know what would be nice.... actually coming to a compromise or agreement. Yes its true, some people are 100% against double teaming (I mean I did flip my shit that time when hope decided to make two idol teams, but then again maybe that was just because I hate Love Live and similar stuff but I digress.) There are also some who are 100% for double teaming, thinking it doesn't really have an impact and we have some people in-between.
So why not make a compromise... or at least try to since from what I can see at this point its slowly devolving into a full on hate festival over here.
I mean like a simple solution is just to have most or all teams keep an up-to-date members list and then let the other teams decide if they want to act on a double teaming person and kick them out of their team if they so desire or have a hatred against double teaming. Or you could just put a limit on a number of teams a single person is allowed to join or such. (E.g like 2 maximum)
Also even if you somehow get it banned, you have a major flaw which is Implementation and Enforcement because one person cannot force or impose their ban onto another team, after all its their team not yours. And even if it gets implemented, its team leaders who will enforce and their is not going be a punishment for breaking the rule.
(Note: was created before NubKnightZ posted just after Zane's post)
Jai Hearts:
pro
if they dont have time and the team doesnt have people to look out for it wouldnt it be better to disband it ? i mean i love area too but the life outside of my computer is more important to me and a choose it over area in a heartbeat. i was close to dissbanding my own team when some people just said hey let us help. in the end the object is not running a team but being on a team. wouldnt it be better to be on one with a few people that have the time to set tbs rather then kick a dead horse ? and even so i remembered you where both a members of the original ds and ae in the past, and even do you say now you love it something did happen that it dissbanded and you formed a team that had a no mutli teaming rule if i remember correctly. fact is you yourself prooved then that mutli teaming has its problems if you left both teams.
growing
so if youre good friends with a team you must sub on them or what youre not friends ?
but you yourself said there are alternate options even fight with em join in there training. even my team train allot with other teams and mix it up, but when it comes to tbs we show what our team is. you dont need to sub for a team because there your friend, or do you date other girls when your wife is at home ? (unless you know xD menage)
Toxic
it does actually since look at most teams, same people that have been on here for years, you yourself say they are considered randoms. even my team and many others who dont mutli team had members who where considered randoms or weaklings and they grew because they got a chance.
you seem to only look at whats positive for you, im sorry for what happened with BS but people dont agree with you and you only keep repeating your same narrow minded view that you think it helps that mutli teaming must be the best option. people once taught smoking was harmless and in time that too was proven wrong. zane i get it thats your view but can we agree that sometimes our views are potentially wrong ? you yourself had a team with no mutli team and so many came to join you but you yourself send people away claiming that the where not up to standards of what a team members should be for you, so cant we just open our minds ? cant we try to bring in and help people grow ? or do you rather alienate those you see in the forest till you find the golden goose ? im not saying we need to only take in good people hell a few weeks ago my team took in a total novice to train.
you say mutli teams help grow help get allong but its actions are the opisite with those teams sharing only the same people giving almost no one thats new a chance to grow, it is infact keeping them in a closed circle untill they see someone they like and try to bring em in. there are even mutli teaming teams controlling some of these new members telling em to not go on another team till they leave that team and the leader might tell em to come back.
so how is mutli teaming helping the community grow improve and communcate if we are ostractzing others and keeping a closed and narrow mind and our only respons for mutli/double is its helping and youre narrow minded ?
Yukkuri Shinji:
I personally am against double and multi teaming in the first place. I don't see how can one even try to stand up for such idea. I do agree that sometimes one or two teams need a sub for a team battle or such which can be fine if it is mentioned but being in two teams at once is as being in no team at all.
I also find that teams while open should have some team limit so more teams are open and more team battles are offered instead of having a single team with 40 members where only 15 of them are active. Some major reset should be done. At least among some official CFA teams that are mentioned on forum.
Community is small and all, I know but I find that with this tempo there won't be any community but a bunch of people that know each other and just switch the team when they feel like it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version