Dead Men Walking

Fellow admins,

QuoteIf it aint broke, don't fix it.

With that in mind ... what's 'broke'? Is the community failing you.

From the recent posts I take it that there are three main areas for debate:

• Has CS (in all it's guises) become boring and should we be looking to adopt other multiplayers?
• Should Charlie membership be by invitation only?
• Is it necessary to distinguish between match-players and non match-players?

Debate started.

First of all No i dont have any internet yet just friends who let me use there pc whilst they're not looking.

CS is now Dull ...i like the simplicity of it but the maps, guns effects etc kill it.

Yes Charlie should be invite only.

Match players should have a different tag to community players.

IMHO


I will return in a few days when someone allows me my tipple of net

My 2p:

The community is not failing me :)

CS isn't broke it's just that we have too many versions, many of the community are playing CZ or CS:S and very few, if any, want to play CS1.6. However, playing CZ or CS:S on the same old CS1.6 maps is starting to get a bit boring. We need some good quality TCS style maps as a splurge of freshness :D

Yes, Charlie should be by invitation only. A proposal and seconder should nominate someone.

A match player should be a Charlie a non-match player should be a Bravo (that is the only real diff as far as I can tell) -> Problem, what do you do with people like me, Ron and Smilo who DO want to play matches but cannot do so regularly? Should we have a requirement for a minimum number of "I'm avail" selections in any 6 month period to remain a "valid" Charlie? Ooooh, I like adding questions :)

1: No. But.........the waters have been muddied by all the versions. On a personal note, I'm all for have the latest of anything so maybe I'm blind to the pitfalls in Source. Time to say adieu to 1.6 though. As for other games, having more to choose from will only fragment things more.
2: Yes
3: No. There are people that thrive on matchplay and them what don't. They all know who they are. If they want a clique that absolutely fine. And I don't mean that in a derogatory way. Those that simply enjoy the cameraderie of dMw should be allowed to do so without feeling a lesser human bean. Oh, just so long as the matchers don't hijack servers. Let them use Baldric for their strategies etc.
I reckon that if anyone wants a match he will make it known.
My 2c

1. Nope but i think its time to drop 1.6 and go with just CZ

2. Yes invitation only

3. There should be a match playing section within charlie. As its been said we have 40+ members and only 15 regulars that play so let those charlies that want to play matches play on the days best for them.  iam not sure if a diffrent tag is requied as we are all dMw  :)  Just sort out..Those that are the match players to the ones that dont want to play regular .
The members that want to play now and again we could sort out friendly's etc (just a thought)

QuoteOriginally posted by squonk@Dec 28 2004, 03:43 PM
3. There should be a match playing section within charlie. As its been said we have 40+ members and only 15 regulars that play so let those charlies that want to play matches play on the days best for them. iam not sure if a diffrent tag is requied as we are all dMw :) Just sort out..Those that are the match players to the ones that dont want to play regular .
The members that want to play now and again we could sort out friendly's etc (just a thought)

[post=73242]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

:withstupid:

Good point. If Charlie is invitation only then that person has been invited for a reason; either because he is an awesome match player AND a credit to dMw or he has a lot to offer dMw AND is a credit to dMw (a la Tugs) <- Note the common denomitor :D

If people are in Charlie then do we really need to separate those who play matches regularly from those who do not. As Ron mentioned earlier (or was it in another thread) when we were invited to join dMw (before Charlie existed) matchplay was not the raison d'etre but a byline. The raison d'etre was PCS as it was then called.

The whole Charlie/Delta thing has got out of hand. Until we define the aim of Charlie we can't define how it should be structured.  Charlie should be to push the good name of dMw, encourage TCS and (if they want to) play matches. We don't need Delta or Echo or anything else like that. If people need to feel that they are in a superior group then maybe they are diverging from the the needs of TCS (and that is not aimed at anybody before anybody takes the hump).

TCS should and must come first or else we are just another clan with some funny server rules. We aren't and shouldn't even aspire to be.

I'm going to stop now because this is starting to wander a bit (time for my tablets) but I guess people will see how I feel.

1. Yes. There are too many versions and we all seem to prefer different ones. We need to settle down to play one specific version. Sadly we will have to be led in this by the CS gaming community and the leagues we play in. Adding non CS related games may well add levels of confusions and fragmentation which is what I believe we should be moving away from. I have a particular interest in maps and having three versions of the game is making getting this sorted a complete nightmare. I don't even know what our default version is, let alone what maps we should be playing.

2. Yes definately. Charlie is for a specific group of people within the dMw community. We know who we are and why we're members. Even if we can't define it properly. Recent additions to our numbers have undermined that group identity. I'm increasing thinking of myself less as a Charlie member and more as an Admin member when defining where I like to sit within the community. Charlie doesn't really mean anything anymore :(

3. Yes. But there should be some distinction between Charlie members and match players.

QuoteOriginally posted by smilodon@Dec 28 2004, 03:55 PM
2. Yes definately. Charlie is for a specific group of people within the dMw community. We know who we are and why we're members. Even if we can't define it properly. Recent additions to our numbers have undermined that group identity. I'm increasing thinking of myself less as a Charlie member and more as an Admin member when defining where I like to sit within the community. Charlie doesn't really mean anything anymore :(

[post=73244]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

That's a good point and describes quite accurately how I have been feeling - Charlie has become diluted because we allowed people to apply rather than saying "invites" and then we all got carried away and voted lots of people onboard.

We do need fresh blood but do we need it aas regularly.

1. I think we should edge towards CZ but keep a 1.6 server up....as for going to another game this may spilt the comunity more.    

2. Invitation could be the way to go...It will help prevent disapointing people like ghost.

3. I dont see any reason to seperate non-match/match players. The current squad system works well for ghost's at the moment. Sunday is a popular match day tho

Definately go more towards CZ but as JAS says having one 1.6 server would be a good thing.

Definately by invite only, but as BB said to people we feel are going to offer something to Charlie company not just because they are awesome shots.

I would like to play more matchs but unfortunately work means I am often away from home and so are unable to do so. I don't think that we should split Charlie up into another squad, if you make yourself available and are on the servers you should have as much chance to play as the next man, it might be an idea for the SLs to ask people on the server if they want to play rather than just picking the usual suspects.

Having thought a little more, things are beginning to pull together.
1: Definately ditch 1.6 and go for CZ or Source. Eventually it will be Source when it shapes up to everyone's liking.  :)
2: Invitation to dMw. Full stop!
3: Stop all this Charlie/Bravo stuff. It's elitist. You are either dMw or you're not.

OK, there are admins, gotta have 'em, if only to keep a bit of order sometimes. That's as far as deliniation should go.

If you want to play matches, make it known. (I think I've repeated myself there) If you make the team you'll be like a college 'jock', we'll know who you are.
 :dmw:
Over.

1. CS is dead and it is rather obvious. The only time I play CS is when we have matches other than that is CZ. Focus on CZ and Source. Source is still in its cradle but could evolve to something good. Keep one CS server.

2. Yes. Invite only.

3. Yes. If not then the range of bravo to delta is completely pointless.  People apply for Charlie to be in matches and it seems like some have forgot that. Read the community structure. Bravo is the social part of the structure and charlie is for matches. That destinction was made 1.5 years ago and I haven't seen or heard any protests regarding it.

FInal comment:
I know there are match playing charlies that felt robbed when there was no real match commitment and thus stopped playing. I know charlies that consider leaving dMw for other clans because of the current state. I think that is worth mentioning.

/thunks  :unsure:

The thoughts and comments are appreciated peeps.  :winkiss:

But I need to cogitate a wee bit more  :whistle:

And then I'll reply.........  :blush:

TL.

QuoteOriginally posted by Dr Sadako@Dec 28 2004, 06:39 PM
FInal comment:
I know there are match playing charlies that felt robbed when there was no real match commitment and thus stopped playing. I know charlies that consider leaving dMw for other clans because of the current state. I think that is worth mentioning.

[post=73257]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

That works both ways ;)

gotta go out - i'll post more later

So the sticking points seems to be number three. How do we structure the core clan membership?

I can see the problem squad leaders have, in that they have no real idea who is actually a functioning match player and who isn't. The only way they can find out is to observe players not making themselves available over a period of time, which isn't that efficient a method. It seems quite understandable to make a distinction between match playing members and occassional or non playing members.

The additional issue is that non match players don't fall into a single definable group. There are non match players who are otherwise full and active members of the core community and non match players who have that title through being historical early members of the clan but who play no part now, or finally who have received membership as recognition and reward for sterling efforts in supporting the clan i.e during our hacking crisis.

Just having a catch all Charlie squad for all of us isn't really fair on Squad Leaders. It's no suprise that Sadako is a clear supporter of change as he is a major organiser of matches for the clan and suffers the consequences of the problem.

On the other hand multiple squads can lead to confusion and elitism if not managed properly.

So I'd argue that there does need to be means of identifying active Charlie members, community activists (for want of a better term) and Charlie members who are inactive both in the community and in match play. Basically three groups.

So always willing to stick my neck out here goes.

Inactive Charlie members who neither play matches or participate in the community on a regular basis should revert to Bravo's. A tough call but I can't see the point of just having names on a list if there isn't a person behind that name anymore.

Match playing Charlies stay as they are. Ghosts, Phantoms, Zombies and Deltas remain unchanged.

Active community members who offer something to the community beyond or apart from playing matches recieve a junior admin role (TCS Admin or something similar). We currently have 28 Charlie members and looking through the list I'd argue there were two or three inactives and another two or three who are serious community members but not regular match players. So we're not talking about a big shake up.

So we'd have

1. Community Admins who have full admin rights as they do now, such as TL, Oldie, GLJ and Sadako etc. So there'd be no change to that.

2. An additional few TCS Admins (with or without Rcon as deemed appropriate by the Admins) for Charlie members who fit the bill. i.e Tugs, Benny and Sheepy.

3. Removal of most Shadows to Bravo (contentious I know).

In addition admins who don't play many matches (Smilodon, Doorman, Stryker etc.) as well as having their Admin and TCS admin status could also be added to Shadow. This would allow us to maybe play the odd match (or at least offer ourselves for selection) from time to time.

This doesn't add any additional groups into the pot, leaves the Ghost, Zombie, Phantom, Delta and Shadow structure is it is, recognises serious community members who don't play matches and offers them a title and status within the community and clears out people back to Bravo (who I would now argue are just names on a list)  that clearly no longer play any part in the dMw community.

Chew on that folks  :)

Forgive me if I misinterpret Mats but from your post in the other thread my understanding is that one of the big probs is people who make themselves avail and then can't be found.

If I'm correct then it would appear to me that this is the issue we really need to address. The avail page is an excellent system and, if used properly by clan members, should make things workable for the SLs.

I do remember the odd occasion where there has been poor avail for a match but usually there are more names than slots available (IIRC)

Are we really addressing the issue or are we skirting round it? Are the regular match players sick of turning up for all the matches for the clan or are they quite happy getting all the matches they want? If they are happy getting all the matches they want then the issue must be availability so lets address that.

As to "spring cleaning" the Charlie Group we have:

Admins
DogMeat
Gandalf-LordOfJelly
OldBloke
Stryker
TeaLeaf

dMw Admins
albert
Dr Sadako
FatBob
Gh0st Face Killah  
JonnyAppleSeed
smite
squonk

TCS Admins
BlueBall
Doorman
smilodon

Charlie Company
Aga  
Armitage  
Benny  
ChimpBoy  
DarkAngel  
DonkeyCheeseGrater  
Doris
DuVeL
FATAL  
FBG    
FrEnZy  
Ice Hawk  
Jamoe    
JB    
MAD_ness  
MisterEggs  
Niel  
Rad_Man  
Red_Thunder    
ScraT  
SecretSquirrel  
sheepy  
Swiss  
target  
tugs
TuToNiC
Vincentvega  
whitey
Zok

I think that OB and TL would have to look through the avail database (we can't see the historical entries) to cross check who makes themselves available and maybe make a Red, Amber, Green list of activity.

However, I still think that if avail is used properly then it doesn't matter whether you are an avid match player or not. All that matters is that you use the damn page and stand by your commitment to play if you make one.

I think that people who are not active in dMw for a period should become Shadows (painful though it may be). After a further period they should automatically become Bravos unless the clan is notified of a reason for lack of activity - someone moving house and it takes ages to sort internet access or extended illness or whatever.

This is turning into quite a discussion  :ph34r:

QuoteOriginally posted by BlueBall@Dec 29 2004, 11:58 AM
Forgive me if I misinterpret Mats but from your post in the other thread my understanding is that one of the big probs is people who make themselves avail and then can't be found.

If I'm correct then it would appear to me that this is the issue we really need to address. The avail page is an excellent system and, if used properly by clan members, should make things workable for the SLs.

Yes this have been a problem of late imho. I know I have been chasing players for charlie (zombie and other squads) matches and delta matches. First I have tried to hunt down players that have put them down as avail. Using mainly gametiger, MSN, and friends to locate them. When I haven't found them I have asked non-available and maybe that have been playing on our or other servers. On many occations I have asked player that I for sure knew "were on a break" to play as they were the only ones I could get hold of. So the avaíl system hasn't been used correctly imho.

I've reread the thread. (waiting for kids to get up.... idle gits)

The first two points oldie addressed i think most of us agree with (those that have posted)
1 Move over to CZ keeping one cs server.

2 Invite to Charlie.

Moving on to players avil and match playing as i see it we have 3 groups
non players/play occasionally /main match players.

Looking at the stats pages this is how it looks to me.

Dont Play

DogMeat
Gandalf-LordOfJelly
Stryker
TuToNiC
tugs
Swiss
SecretSquirrel
Rad_Man
MisterEggs
DonkeyCheeseGrater
Flibber Meister
Smilodon
Doorman


Play occasionally

Albert
ChimpBoy
FATAL
Armitage
FatBob
Benny
Gh0st Face Killah
JB
Target
Sheepy
0ni0n
BlueBall
Niel
Doris
Jamoe
Target


Main match players

Sadako
Smite.Thee
Squonk
MAD_ness
FrEnZy!
DuVeL
DarkAngel
OldBloke
Red
Ice Hawk
JonnyAppleSeed
TeaLeaf
VincentVega
Whitey
zok

So if the last group of players was split into two, we could keep 4 squads. This would mean the two main match playing squads would nearly always get a team as these are the players avil more than most to play.

Just thinking out loud  :)

If we are low on players for a match I have been known to turn to "shadow" people and ask if they would be ok to play ...I would not want to loose that option by putting them in Bravo :D

I started this thread by asking for the problems to be defined. I'm not entirely convinced we've achieved that. Taking the three bullet points in order.

1. How will we know when it's time to move away from CS/CZ/CS:S? Are we seeing the signs of that day approaching now and will we be acting too late if we fail to recognise those signs in time? Is the lack of match availability a sign? Are the servers less active and, if so, is that a sign? Do members prefer to play public with BoD than TCS? Do we have a problem here?

2. Charlie membership applications by invite. Why? What's the problem with the current method? How would moving to an invitation model help? Surely we'd still get the people we want using either method. Wouldn't we?

3. Why are we focussing on matches and availability? It has absolutely nothing to do with being a Charlie ...

QuoteA member of Charlie Company is *not* just a match-playing Bravo. No way. TeaLeaf and I are happy to apply the 'no problem' rule to Bravo applicants but Charlie membership requires a much stricter set of criteria. This is why there is a mandatory two-month probation period for all new Charlie members to make sure that they are made of the 'right stuff'. During those two month we, as admins, will make sure that we monitor them closely, provide coaching/training/advice where necessary and provide feedback on their performance. Anyone not coming up to scratch will be bounced back to Bravo.

Charlie members must be made of the 'right stuff'. Whether they play matches or not is, IMHO, immaterial. And for those that do wish to represent dMw in matches we have the availability pages to organise that. Where's the problem? Bouncing people to Shadow or even Bravo helps how?

OK. I've played Devil's advocate to some extent and certainly asked more questions. But again I ask ... where's the problem?

Is it a feeling of dilution? A loss of identity? Do you resent the Bravos wearing the tag? At the end of the day we have an inner circle within dMw. Friends old and new. Many from the early days of LAN 1 and I'm sure a few wishing we were still a small group of aging gamers enjoying each other's company. But we've evolved and created a community out of the desire of others to feel part of what we represent. Because, make no mistake, we are the best.

OK
yes i do resent the Bravos wearing the -=[dMw]=- tag. This Tag means a lot to me, the friends i have. The way i play. To alot of the bravo's and some charlies i would guess it means nothing just a tag

So again yes i do feel we have lost our identity.

So this must mean iam one of the peeps that still wish we were still a small group of aging gamers enjoying each other's company.

Invite only why? Because when one of our trusted admins/friends (how ever we see each other) comes to us with a name of a person who they think would be a good addition to the dmw way we can be sure or near as damm it this person is gonna be a credit to dmw.

System for match playing peeps amonst us..iam still thinking  

I for one and i know iam not alone, look on our servers and if there arnt peeps we know/want to play with then tbh i dont join..sometimes i join an empty server hoping that those that i want to play with join and not a lot of bravos who always push the tcs way to the limit and not to mention the omg/wtf/ffs/i got 10 health etc etc etc they type.

Maybe it is time to look at another game ..keep CZ but lets find out what esle we all want to play..I for one havnt got many games but if you all decide to start playing BF then i can be sure i will be out too the shops and buy it ..as iam not really botherd what game i play just as long as i play with you lot.

if you wasnt looking for honesty then plz delete this post as ive just made a fool of meself

Steve

QuoteOriginally posted by squonk@Dec 29 2004, 04:01 PM
if you wasnt looking for honesty then plz delete this post as ive just made a fool of meself

Steve

[post=73313]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

We are always looking for honesty.  The only fool is one who is not true to himself.

TL.

QuoteOriginally posted by OldBloke+Dec 29 2004, 05:26 PM-->

QUOTE(OldBloke @ Dec 29 2004, 05:26 PM)

I started this thread by asking for the problems to be defined. I'm not entirely convinced we've achieved that. Taking the three bullet points in order.

1. How will we know when it's time to move away from CS/CZ/CS:S? Are we seeing the signs of that day approaching now and will we be acting too late if we fail to recognise those signs in time? Is the lack of match availability a sign? Are the servers less active and, if so, is that a sign?
[/b]

I think it is time to move away from CS as our main game. It is evident that we have lots of regulars playing CZ and less playing CS. I think the move to CZ is something we should do asap.

QuoteOriginally posted by OldBloke+Dec 29 2004, 05:26 PM-->

QUOTE(OldBloke @ Dec 29 2004, 05:26 PM)

Do members prefer to play public with BoD than TCS? Do we have a problem here?
[/b]

Yes I think we have a problem here. Let's face the facts CS isn't played on our servers. Still we have 2 servers running. Source is still in it's cradle but there is not enough players to justify a TCS Source password protected server. Maximum number of people being on at the same time? 8? 10? Most of the time it just sits empty. When source is good enough I think we could consider supporting it. Right now?  Not a chance.

I know way back that some were very reluctant to even set up one CZ server for testing purposes as it would drive people away from TCS. Now with 3 games (at a time even 4 games) and 5 servers, that is ok? I don't think it is working at least.

My suggestion would be to have 3 servers.

TCZ Meathook
TCZ Razer Public Stats server
TCZ Baldric Match Server

I know that the stats server will hurt your eyes and shake your foundations but face it we are struggling to get a full server. If we could steal a bit of the competition from the BoD server I think that is a good idea.

I'd rather have Doris, Hippy, DuVeL, Ice etc statswhore on our server and populate it instead of having them at the BoD server. We need to show there are players on our servers for more than 2 hours per evening. If I understand it correctly you can decide how the stats points are awarded so why not increase the points for completing the objectives and reduce the points for kills. I know it is not in line with TCS but it is a good alternative to the loss of players we currently have. This should be a public server with NO restrictions in regard to public play irrespectively if they are TCS players or not. If they want restrictions they will play on our TCZ server. I know I do at least.

We have over 500 registered forum users and 40+ charlies and still we don't manage to fill up our servers. BoD has barely 100 forum users (of which dMw constitutes a considerable part) and have 5000+ players on per month ... imagine that on one of our servers.
If even only 0.1% of those 5000+ were interested in in TCZ we would have 5 new TCZ player per month. I think the price of one public CZ server is worth that.