Suggestion Thread: Let's get down to some specifics. - Page 15

BlackSolider · #**211** 03-29-2009, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cetellic

Yeah... you don't know what you're talking about... I dont know why you even bothered.

Rofl. Your arrogance is really something. If there are 40 people on (however unlikely,) a GC should host an event to get as many people involved as possible, like an LMS event. Hosting an LMS event lets everyone willing join, and thus people aren't left out.

Say you host allstar with 40 people online. Realistically you're only going to summon 8 people (since you'd have to get exactly 16 people to make it work well otherwise,) and thus possibly leave some people out. So while a dozen people or so are off having fun (maybe,) another dozen people or so are sitting on the overworld doing nothing. At that point, what compels them to stay on the server? Right now, very little.

All I'm saying is that you host to your playercount. If the playercount is shaky, don't try to host an 8 player event, because right now we're only getting 5-6 people usually. If the playercount is solid, host a 10-12 person event. If the playercount is high, host an event that lets everyone play. It's pretty lame when you're sitting on the overworld while all your friends are in an event you wanted to join but couldn't.

Anyways feel free to explain yourself if you find it worth your oh-so-valuable time.

Shadow87 · #**212** 03-29-2009, 07:28 PM

Although that is true Gladius, sometimes you want to leave some people out, because if you are a GOOD GC , then you plan on hosting again, and again, atleast 5 times until your going to go off tag. So when you host one event, and people get left out, they know to wait for the next one, and be even faster to send in than they were the last time!

Sure throw in an all server LMS or a 32 man allstar, if you can, but you don't want to get packed out events every time, imagine the lag.

Now a days it would be nice to host to player count though considering we dont have a big one to often. But you GC guys also need to up your game a bit to, you may not have a big player count all the time, but i remember when i was GC we still didnt have that great of player count, and sometimes we had it real low, but there were some of us always hosting, 10 people on, Ok, am going to host a strain of events in studio A!! Or GC will take turns, you guys dont do this anymore, Ive really noticed that the bond the GC team used to have just went away and is no longer there.

Cetellic · #**213** 03-29-2009, 10:37 PM

Hmm

Gladius in your first post you state GCs are free to host what they want and how they want... you'd agree that what I'm saying is legal, though you may not see how it helps. Now your side of the picture I don't agree with, and it may be legal, but I have analyzed it to the point where I know of it's advantages/disadvantages, if I wanted to host the popular events I could do it and make the best of it, you're only one side of the picture though you don't even know where to begin when it comes to hosting unpopulars or creative mockups... the statement that "hosting Drunken Stupor on a 45 playercount is disgusting" tells the tale, it is disgusting if you're planning to host Drunken Stupor in the same fashion as a mainstream, but how you use mainstreams is only one of many styles? So I can't help but ask why are we being one dimensional?

The funny part was you said GCs can go off-brand but they shouldn't have to if they don't want to. It's like saying GCs can be helpful but they shouldn't have to if they do want to...

As for your second post Tats sums it up nicely.

Mystic, Classic doesn't need up to date resources means something completely different to me, which is a revamp, or a remake. Not getting that doesn't mean we're doomed to stay the same - You sit here and listen to me talk about being creative, doing different things, and then completely disregard it, like I threw everything I said out the window when I made the statement...

Your "less talk more rock" attitude is good and all, but I've been hosting this week with good results, so the rock part is taken care of...

BlackSolider · #**214** 03-29-2009, 10:37 PM

I've seen a few GCs take turns hosting. Not as often as it could happen, but it does occur.

BlackSolider · #**215** 03-29-2009, 11:55 PM

Like I've said before, a GC's job is to host fun, enjoyable, and fair events for everyone who wants to play. Personally, I don't find drunken stupor or many other off-brand events that much fun; certainly not as fun as a good ctf or lms. Therefor, as a GC, I tend to host the events I find more fun than the ones I don't find to be fun.

Judging from your posts, you sometimes find off-brand fun. Thus, by my logic above, you see no problem with hosting them. So whats the issue? Apparently GCs host events they, or the people online (requests,) find to be fun. If a GC finds off-brand events to be fun, he'll host them. If a GC finds off-brand events to not be fun, he won't host them. Should this stop GCs from hosting certain events at all? Definitely not.

Just because I don't find off-brand events that fun, doesn't mean I won't host them. Pictionary isn't hosted that often, and personally I really don't like playing nor hosting it. But I've hosted it before. I could go into more examples, but I think you get the point.

GCs host what they find to be fun. Should they still host events they might not find to be fun? Sure, if they can get the people to join. I feel that GCs shouldn't try to force unpopular events to the people, so I don't host them that much. I try to host a variety of events, but only those that I feel I can consistently get people for. If other GCs want to try to host other events, then they can do so.

MysticX2X · #**216** 03-30-2009, 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cetellic

Mystic, Classic doesn't need up to date resources means something completely different to me, which is a revamp, or a remake. Not getting that doesn't mean we're doomed to stay the same - You sit here and listen to me talk about being creative, doing different things, and then completely disregard it, like I threw everything I said out the window when I made the statement...

Your "less talk more rock" attitude is good and all, but I've been hosting this week with good results, so the rock part is taken care of...

I am not going to take "we have enough resources" fora an answer. The GC tool is bland, and the only nice update to it in the past few months was the return of freezetag.

Our events are un-updated. Our hosting style is un-updated and old. Other servers outshine this and we can barely attract any players from other servers who have been used to seeing events in a flash.

Renovations, altercations, and all that is nice. But that is not my idea of innovative updates.

Shadow87 · #**217** 03-30-2009, 02:49 AM

Just because the GC might not have fun with the event, does not mean the player will not have fun with it. You have to host everything, and that means everything. From the top of the list to the bottom of the list, either through requests or your own choice. It just what being a GC comes with.

BlackSolider · #**218** 03-30-2009, 03:05 AM

If only a minority of players will have fun with the event (much less join,) why should a GC host a "bottom of the list" event rather than a "top of the list" event that, presumably, more people will enjoy?

MysticX2X · #**219** 03-30-2009, 03:05 AM

There is very limited real events with levels and explanation. Most other events you may be referring to are GC created from the past and not very well documented to later GC's.

You don't have to host every event possible. It'd be nice for variety, but most people just don't play those events (and when i mean that, i mean 0 people), which has been the case not to host the events you'd want to imagine.

Shadow87 · #**220** 03-30-2009, 03:07 AM

I dont accept that, i feel if you had 4 active players, people actually looking at their screen, and you hosted something in studio A involving 4 players, that you could get 4. I just dont see anyone try to host those events, just assuming here and there.

BlackSolider · #**221** 03-30-2009, 04:36 AM

Like I said, I don't find playing nor hosting 4 player events fun, so I won't host them. If you can find me a good reason to motivate me to host a 4 player event, then I might consider hosting them. Maybe. Possibly. Who knows. Good luck.

MysticX2X · #**222** 03-30-2009, 05:00 AM

Sorry, Gladius, but I cannot agree with you on that. 4 player events are nice. Maybe not for larger events such as a spar tourney or a ctf, but for lms' of any sort, it is a nice out. Including Drunken Stupor and BQ.

BlackSolider · #**223** 03-30-2009, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSolider

If a GC finds off-brand events to be fun, he'll host them.

Ok then. If you find them fun, then host them. I won't.

Luda · #**224** 03-30-2009, 08:11 AM

clouds around big map please

Cetellic · #**225** 03-30-2009, 09:47 AM

Overhosting an event will kill it, in the same light as retelling the same joke over and over will murder it. An overhost of good-popular-events will kill that group of events which even further deteriorates the bad-unpopular-events. It can go no where positive, soon people will get sick of those "good" events and only want "really good" events, we lose some options. Of course this happens more rapidly if you're getting a large number of players for each good event for obvious reasons.

If you don't host certain events cause you fear you won't get the players, or you just always wanna host the better events/what people request, it's a bad call; you limit yourself + lose control, now they're expecting **** to be given to them and will boycott or just not join at all when you don't give em what they want. This indirectly (whether it's intended or not) forces GCs to stick with the popular events, else we just won't be providing service.

Now you can do whatever, obviously there's no rules on what events you host, so ya there's no point in trying to force anyone to do anything. Just don't get pissy when you get called on your mishaps.