View Poll Results: What do?

Voters
23. You may not vote on this poll
  • Kick them after a few warnings, don't let a few bad apples spoil the whole basket

    21 91.30%
  • Active people are a rarity and it's ok to overlook such indiscretions because of the alternative

    2 8.70%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 32 of 32

Thread: [Poll] Guildies who don't follow instructions/rules

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    4,972
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    At the end of the day -you- decide if you want to see all the various grays or if you just want to see things more black and white.
    From a point of view, it's not a matter of black and whites vs. grays but a question of values. Do people value getting goals accomplished in the game, or do people value blindly following rules? For example, rules that people all hit within the same gate don't necessarily accomplish what people really want, which is to work together as a guild and win the battle with as many coins as possible. If everybody could be relied on to hit where is strategically best for themselves and the guild, with a recommended gate for coordination rather than an absolute rule that everybody has to hit that gate, then (a) there's less tripping because not everybody's hitting the same gate, (b) everybody has an incentive to look at other gates for strategic points, (c) searching other gates for strategic points gives people more incentive to think about and become more involved in battle, and (d) that in turn makes battle more fun for everybody who likes thinking about strategy, which helps retain and train the next generation of officers without making current officers feel like people are disrespecting or arguing with their orders. Basically, if a guild values winning over following orders, it's very easy to forgive people who disobey orders to win the battle (or get more 100v100 ranking points for the guild), especially if they announce where they're hitting before they do it so people can avoid stepping on each other's toes. So, keeping people who disobey battle orders isn't an issue with shades of gray but a guild being very clear on white=win/black=lose vs white=obey/black=disobey.

    Second, from what you describe I don't think you use caps the same as most of us do.
    Most of us set caps to allow everyone to do an equal amount of damage.
    Not everybody wants or is capable of doing an equal amount of damage.

    If you get someone come in and go "well... I'm going to do three times the cap in this one" then you quite literally are taking away the entire purpose of the cap and as a result are denying two people a chance to get their damage in.
    Not everybody joins every monster. The result of someone saying they'll do 3x damage is that the bottom two people know ahead of time to not waste stamina on that monster because they know they won't be able to get the damage they want, and they go declare whatever damage they want on the next monster. There's an endless supply of monsters. If someone wants 3x on the same monster for whatever reason, there's no reason why they shouldn't do 3x on that monster. It's more efficient for the whole guild because they don't waste as much stamina recharging Barbarus as they would doing 1x on 3 monsters. Letting people set as large a cap they want helps the whole guild cycle through Mist monsters faster. The catch is that everybody in the guild has to reserve and subtract the cap they want.
    Just another Castle Age player
    army code: D422AE

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Falco View Post
    From a point of view, it's not a matter of black and whites vs. grays but a question of values. Do people value getting goals accomplished in the game, or do people value blindly following rules? For example, rules that people all hit within the same gate don't necessarily accomplish what people really want, which is to work together as a guild and win the battle with as many coins as possible. If everybody could be relied on to hit where is strategically best for themselves and the guild, with a recommended gate for coordination rather than an absolute rule that everybody has to hit that gate, then (a) there's less tripping because not everybody's hitting the same gate, (b) everybody has an incentive to look at other gates for strategic points, (c) searching other gates for strategic points gives people more incentive to think about and become more involved in battle, and (d) that in turn makes battle more fun for everybody who likes thinking about strategy, which helps retain and train the next generation of officers without making current officers feel like people are disrespecting or arguing with their orders. Basically, if a guild values winning over following orders, it's very easy to forgive people who disobey orders to win the battle (or get more 100v100 ranking points for the guild), especially if they announce where they're hitting before they do it so people can avoid stepping on each other's toes. So, keeping people who disobey battle orders isn't an issue with shades of gray but a guild being very clear on white=win/black=lose vs white=obey/black=disobey.
    I think the two go hand in hand.

    When you have a group of people you can't expect people to get their goals accomplished unless there are at least some rules being followed.

    That said, I also agree that some level of forgiveness is desired.

    If you read back you'll find that my first reaction describes a form of three strike system where people initially are forgiven their offenses.

    At the end of the day following agreed upon rules is just as important a part of our social structure as allowing people to accomplish their goals.

    Quote Originally Posted by Falco View Post
    Not everybody wants or is capable of doing an equal amount of damage.
    The nice thing about caps is that they don't -have- to do that amount of damage.

    It's more like a speed limit.

    The maximum that they are allowed to do.

    If they can or want to only do half, good for them.

    (note that with speed limits there is also often an unadvertised minimum limit so I would not recommend doing half the speed listed on a speed limit sign. :P)

    Quote Originally Posted by Falco View Post
    Not everybody joins every monster. The result of someone saying they'll do 3x damage is that the bottom two people know ahead of time to not waste stamina on that monster because they know they won't be able to get the damage they want, and they go declare whatever damage they want on the next monster. There's an endless supply of monsters. If someone wants 3x on the same monster for whatever reason, there's no reason why they shouldn't do 3x on that monster. It's more efficient for the whole guild because they don't waste as much stamina recharging Barbarus as they would doing 1x on 3 monsters. Letting people set as large a cap they want helps the whole guild cycle through Mist monsters faster. The catch is that everybody in the guild has to reserve and subtract the cap they want.
    Everyone does things differently.

    When we set caps they are generally set for a time limit.

    For example, our orc hordes are generally set with a 40 million cap until I do believe 72 hours remaining.

    At that point the cap is lifted.

    Effectively that means that everyone gets their chance to get their damage in and those who wish to do more can do so after the cap is lifted.
    "Build a man a fire, keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life!" - Rev Sim

    "Gratuitous acts of senseless violence are -my- forte!" - Max

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •