Project Reality Forums

Onil wrote:The structure is good but it all comes down to 3 things:

- Admins, CO's and Clan leaders/representatives being able to balance the division of clans and previous tournament squads or veteran players between both teams.
- Teams supporting each-other in their improvement to maintain a good balance and providing a more challenging gameplay.
- CO's and PL/SL using strict rules in regards to activity, discipline and dedication and kicking the ones that do not fill in the requirements. Instead of keeping them around for the numbers.

If you make it hard to get in TART because it is selective, then you guaranty high quality.

As P.Funk said, people want what they can't have... PRT was almost always full because it was actually hard to get in. And since there are so many players trying to get in, you don't have an issue with the lack of numbers and you can kick the bad apples cause you know you will get new ones.

I guess this all depends on what type of quality the CO's and their staff will be looking for.

Yes. This is the big challenge. And I hope I can get it working.

You could ban clans and have only people there, that might encourage team-work with other teams apart from squad. If clans can't remove their tags in game ''example [reF] john to john" then they can make an alt account and join the server. Have admins disable squad creation for clans, and wait until the servers are filled like what CopyCat said.

But that's not going to fix it. The problem isn't clans, it's people in general.

Is the rules of the servers clear, and when you join is it displayed?

THey do remove the tags when they play arab.

Best luck and wishes Wicca, stay strong. And about Lagi Tirak, I would agree with you any day with the reputation of the past about lagi. But Lagi in my eyes lately has changed to something better and mature, I ain't asslicking but that's the fact, what he does right now, today or tomorrow on public game nights is just what kind of person he is, but in the big picture I believe he changed, so lets see how this works out. See you there everyone

Dorn if you end up in my team I promise to learn German language <3

/CC

Ja, Copy, das musst du unbedingt machen. (trans: You really need to do that!)
Lection One: CopyCat = Kopierkatze

But you need to give me some swedish lessons aswell.
mmmhhhh... swedish blondes....

I think Im going to join Tart again, give it a shot, but I dont know how much time I will have and now Im Beta tester aswell, so maybe I will be Inf Grunt, back to the basics

Team-stacking was never an issue in TART, the issue was that teams did not organize trainings or work towards making themselves better.
How many times did the officers have meetings to find flaws in the team?
How many times were training programs thought out for squads?
How many times did commanders join squad trainings to see if squad leaders could do sufficient training?
How many times did we have Commanders showing and training his officers?
How many grunts were given training on specific topics?
Movement, deviation, positioning, buildings, visual protection, weapons.
I expect not too many times, as I had officers and grunts contacting me on how to do these.

Team can be as good as the best player is.
Team is as good as it wants to be.
If someone knows some tricks, teach them to rest of the team.

Team-stacking was not the issue, your damn defeatism was.

There were some real problems, these were mostly organizational. TART overstep with the 128 player, when we did not have even a basic playerbase which to use. Nobody was in charge, Commanders took ages to make decisions and did not keep their teams in check. Players were just placed into teams with little introduction. Everything was just going forward with its own weight, not a healthy long term plan. Resignations were not progressed, teams were not trained and all discussions were started after announcements were already supposed to be made.

These problems are being fixed by having people actually in charge of the tournament with Commanders doing what they are supposed to, organizing and managing the teams.
We seem to have lot of intellectual people here, would be epic if you'd try to walk the walk instead of just talking the talk.
Were going to keep using same old Commanders if we don't get new-blood, be part of the solution.

^

I would if it wasnt for a few things,

1) Not wanting to really do it because....
2)Dont think i would have a chance of getting it because i wouldnt bring any squad leads with me, i would be wanting to take the randoms more as they dont have clan loyalty and wont en mass leave if i dont give them the job they want (this has happened in a few tournys i have been in, not only the PRT btw) and in the signup post it says those with friends stand the best chance basically.
3)Last time i was a 2iC or a high command etc in tournys i kinda told people to either do their job or fuck off, most picked to fuck off (you can take that as you will as a good 2iC or a bad 1).
4)people barely listened to my suggestions in the past and often would pick to go against me because it was me saying it and pick to do ad hom attacks and not to actually argue against my points or try to see it from my view.
5)to much agro for me, i have enough problems of depression etc, i dont need more of that again like i got in tournies where i put my whole into it to get nothing in return and be told that i am not "trying" and my acomplishments negated as "team efforts" for the sake of well, spite(example, in a battle of iirc 650 tickets or so cant remember, knock out a good 50+ tickets after counting tickets lost, get told not doing my job and that it was a "team effort" and i didnt do anything to effect the score and be blamed for losing).
6)Most my ideas fall outside that of the box and are vermently opposed as i said, mainly because its me who suggested it even if the idea has merit and has worked in the past, not enough room for "new ideas" in most peoples heads.
7)All this hits the commander worse usually making it an unwelcoming job really.

Thats just a few of my own reasons Raic

How about you pick being grunt and enjoy the tournament and not being in the officer staff ?

CopyCat wrote:How about you pick being grunt and enjoy the tournament and not being in the officer staff ?

Thats what i have done for the last like, year and a half Those problems though still exist for others i see doing the jobs (and also somehow i end up getting the abuse sometimes ) and are also worse the higher up you go, thus making them undesired.

Seriously though, alot of the reasons why many i know who used to command in tournys irl or in games dont do it now is because of the agro of it, if the team fails they get blamed, even if it isnt their fault, my point was at Raic basically saying that its the command staffs fault, not the overall system if a team fails, as many times i know that in the teams i have been in all that was offered and done yet the team still failed because it quiet simply wasnt getting a chance to win making morale drop to the point that only 1 in 10 who signed up stayed longer then 2 weeks including in tart. Sure command staffs can be a reason but they are not the only thing that can effect it, theres alot of things that can.

mitchverr wrote:Raic basically saying that its the command staffs fault, not the overall system if a team fails.

"If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame. But, if orders are clear and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers."

If losing means disappearance of morale, we can never have two equal teams. Team loses the team is at fault. Until you accept you are not good enough you will not do any work towards getting better. Commander however is the one who is in charge of making that change and work happen. If team cannot change to better, commander is at fault.

What about the system? You only need to concentrate to train yourself and you men to defeat enemy on the battlefield, all other problems are in no way related to that. TART had problems like I said, but they were all related to organization, not on any system, as nobody was following it.

Raic wrote:"If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame. But, if orders are clear and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers."

Thats alot of **** for alot of the time mate especially for an internet tournament, if the lads disobey it might be the officers fault or it might not, it depends on the overall situation, if the tournament is setup in a way in which the losing side gets battered over and over then officers cant do much about it at all, all they can do is ask for the removal of people and then hope they get new guys who are active, if they are not active then remove them and so on, but as you can guess, this leaves a team in many situations under strength because a team that isnt winning doesnt usually get super active players. Theres also a problem that removing 1 guy might get a whole clan to leave, i have seen this happen in the past, 1 person removed for not following orders or countermanding them, then you get a dozen leaving, this cant be blamed on the officer.


As for the whole "morale" argument you put there, its also **** ignoring my points in total, if you have a system where the winners can keep winning then it isnt the commanders fault every time, sometimes it can be but sometimes it might not be, for example putting a losing team which has lost badly over and over on a map which puts even small skill gaps into being large doesnt help the cause does it? Sure a bad team can go for getting better, but you can bloody help that by picking a map they can win and not a map where its "oh god no matter what we do we just cant win it is physically impossible with our current skill level". That is where you can boost morale, if its a fairly even, decent match then morale doesnt drop, i dont see morale drop in close games, it goes up "damn if we were a little better we might have beaten them, lets improve" for example, 50-100 ticket difference, if it is say, 150-200 ticket difference that is where morale plummets, because 1 team obviously isnt as skilled and it needs improvement but that cant happen in 2 weeks alone, and in that time you will lose alot of people especially if the next battle is just as bad, take it from 1 who has seen it happen many times (from the losing and winning side might i add).


And for "train yourself and your men", its hard to do that if your entire squad just goes missing or resigned en mass because they aint winning or coming close to it meaning new randoms and then they do the same.

Main problem is you cant force anyone to do something they dont want to do on the internet, especially when it comes to being active, participating in trainings or in general just discipline/dedication.

L4gi wrote:Main problem is you cant force anyone to do something they dont want to do on the internet, especially when it comes to being active, participating in trainings or in general just discipline/dedication.

Exactly, irl an officer can courtmarshal a soldier, ingame the best we can do is kick em out, which doesnt help if theres an attendance problem.

(and oh my god i agreed with L4gi on something, i need to go shower )

dirty Mitch

We lose because people don't stay active, we lose because maps are unfair, we lose because people don't do what I tell them to do.

Sigh..

Losing has no effect on morale unless you actively pursue it as the cause. People don't play this game only to win. Morale raises if team feels they are tight pack. Play together, make plans, discuss the enemy, make fun of the enemy, laugh at failures and pursue even the tiniest possibility of victory.

Morale falls when officers whine.
Morale falls when leadership openly blames one or the other.
Morale falls when leadership accuses the other team of cheating.
Morale falls when officers say someone is cheating or that management is not neutral.
Morale falls when players feel things are unfair.
Morale falls when players don't know what is happening.
Morale falls when players don't have anything to do.
Morale falls when players feel they are not part of the team and decisions.

Morale does not fall when things are hard, difficult or near impossible.

32 players is not that many, gathering that many active players should not be a problem. If you actually work in gathering them, not just expecting them to signup. If they still don't stick around, problems are somewhere else, not the team-stacking or losing, period.

Spoken like a guy who has never been on the side that got the shit kicked out of it repeatedly, lol.

And i have never said officers are not a problem, i have distinctly said they are not the ONLY reason that a problem happens and actually yes, a teams morale can plummet if they dont have a chance of winning in a competative game because losing badly isnt fun for anyone really.

32 players is alot actually, if you have a team of only 20 active players and the rest dont show up at all because they dont see a way to win and cant be bothered to show up to train to get better.

mitchverr wrote:Spoken like a guy who has never been on the side that got the shit kicked out of it repeatedly, lol.

You must have not heard of PRT C5-C6-C7 then, cool story bro.
I've had enough first hand experience on what motivates people and what not.

L4gi wrote:Main problem is you cant force anyone to do something they dont want to do on the internet, especially when it comes to being active, participating in trainings or in general just discipline/dedication.

Yes you can, simply refuse to give them something they want unless they do what you want. Want to play in the tourney? Nope.

Problem is, you can't force anyone to do anything anywhere, if you want them to be cool with you. Think you can just kick someone's face in until they do what you tell them to? Cool, see how far that takes you.

Actually i did, i was in the team in C5 and 6 that didnt win a single game lol, but we managed to make them close fights thus our morale didnt drop, the only time it did was when it was horrendous losses in a row on maps which just simply, were not fair to pick.


We can argue circles all we like, the sad thing is, the same problem consistantly was repreated and never fixed, and it wasnt command not having compitant trainings etc alot of the time.

mitchverr wrote:Actually i did, i was in the team in C5 and 6 that didnt win a single game lol.

You will also remember that there weren't only 2 teams. To my understanding C5 was not too kind for us. I remember that my team only won a couple matches at the end of C6 and then were on equal footing in C7 from were we rose to be dominating force in C8.

We can argue circles all we like, the sad thing is, the same problem consistantly was repreated and never fixed, and it wasnt command not having compitant trainings etc alot of the time.

Stacked-teams? Suure.
Bad maps? Your team chose those.
What else were there? Shit that doesn't matter to teams abilities.
Losing? I think it is fun, but that's just me.
I said its not commands fault if team is bad, but its commands fault if it keeps being bad. Remove the bad players and get new in, remove officers not doing their job and get new blood in. There are thousands players playing PR, finding 32 guys is not an impossible feat.

mitchverr wrote:
3)Last time i was a 2iC or a high command etc in tournys i kinda told people to either do their job or fuck off, most picked to fuck off (you can take that as you will as a good 2iC or a bad 1).

4)people barely listened to my suggestions in the past and often would pick to go against me because it was me saying it and pick to do ad hom attacks and not to actually argue against my points or try to see it from my view.

with that attitude its no wonder people barely listened