Author Topic: Rulz is rulz...  (Read 3474 times)

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #15 on: April 18, 2015, 12:17:20 AM »
The vast majority of FSO players abide by the rules and very few deliberately break them. That said we from time to time have problems. If you see something that concerns you please advise a CM after the event or during if you can and you think thats the right call. We do strive to keep things withing the margins. Many times a player will break a rule and they did not realise it. I say this so that folks do not always think that every violation is a deliberate act of sabotage. Many are not.
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline SlipKnt

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #16 on: April 18, 2015, 08:25:53 AM »
The vast majority of FSO players abide by the rules and very few deliberately break them. That said we from time to time have problems. If you see something that concerns you please advise a CM after the event or during if you can and you think thats the right call. We do strive to keep things withing the margins. Many times a player will break a rule and they did not realise it. I say this so that folks do not always think that every violation is a deliberate act of sabotage. Many are not.

This is almost ALWAYS the case.  Usually the CM's warning (and they do this internally so not to embarrass anyone and maintain their dignity) and an adjustment in points as a result of sent evidence (film) will clear the air and we all move on.  I truly believe the FSO community is probably the best community in the game.
DCS:
SlipKnoT
vCSG-3, VMA-513 Flying Nightmares (AV8B)

Offline pops57

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #17 on: April 18, 2015, 11:05:16 AM »
This is how the squad I fly with understands the reality of fso, we flux our numbers more than we'd like but that is how it plays out! Sometimes over by a few sometimes under by a few! We try to hit the numbers but life happens. We are not a squad in the ma but we talk up fso in the main all the time and constantly invite people to come fly with us to get their feet wet. Many have come into fso with us and moved on to squads that fit them better--all good-- come try it/fly it! Numbers = some flex! Alt cap/time attack limits=not so much! I just fly (and most of the time die) fso and want to thank you guys that put in the time and headaches to make this happen. I fly it with my son who lives hundreds of miles away, it is such a great way for us to connect. Thank you! :salute
You know the best part of being an FSO CM?  The ice cream... No, wait, wrong movie.  The best part is the FSO community.  You guys know the rules and everyone makes a concerted effort to follow them.  As to violations like an alt cap . . . the Admin CM's take care of that.  Language and behavior are watched by the Setups.  But, (knock on wood) the problems are usually minor and we all have lots of tools.

However, one of the replies above discusses squad numbers.  Let me tell you my point of view as a Setup.  The numbers rules are in place to allow the Admins to split sides in accordance with their idea of the event.  But, there is also a "fudge" of 2 people over or under.  It's a planning thing by the Admins and also allows the CIC to plot attacks and stay within minimum and maximum on plane numbers.  With that said, we look at trends in numbers.  If your squad doesn't make numbers in a frame, we may (read will) note that... nothing more.  The remedy is to ask you to adjust your numbers for next frame.  We understand that life happens.  However, it is my personal policy NEVER to turn away players because of numbers.  Sure if the event totals 300 to 100 (remember the old days?)  that's gonna be ugly.  Still if your squad is over / under, then PM the Setup and let him advise the Admin.  Don't turn away players.  That said, don't put them in planes that go over maximums either.  If in doubt... ask.  The CMs are there for you guys.

Offline captain1ma

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14384
      • JG54 website
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2015, 09:15:31 PM »
we abide by all the rules as best we can. if we find that we are breaking them, or someone points it out to us, we rectify it immediately.
while we have been caught with our number a "little off", we try to re-allocate our resources to other groups. the other group usually
appreciates our outsourcing and it seems to work for everyone. the operative word its "try"..  we're not always successful.

Offline FiLtH

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6448
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #19 on: April 19, 2015, 12:36:36 AM »
The offending squad must fly the next fso all three frames in the weakest bomber listed.

~AoM~

Offline nooby52

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 990
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #20 on: April 19, 2015, 07:34:06 AM »
I'd hate to see the FSO turn into a bunch tattle-tale, crying babies. Let the people in charge of the events handle it the way they see fit. If one thinks they've been handed a too-stiff penalty, present your case in a PM to the proper authorities and leave the rest of us out of it. :salute

Flying as "South52" for VF-17 Jolly Rogers
17 Squadron - The Hardest Day Battle of Britain
204 Kokutai - Target Rabaul
610 Squadron -TFT Battle of Britain

Offline weiser

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #21 on: April 19, 2015, 07:37:59 AM »
I know that I have been notified a couple of time for slight rule violations,once for numbers and once for alt cap. As stated earlier, I usually do not turn pilots away as it's hard enough to get the squad together on Friday's as it is,and to say they can not fly deters any committments to future events. As for the alt cap I was e-mailed by the FSO staff and an explanation was sent back as to why and how this violation occured.
 As co of the 162nd I am adiment with the squad to follow any rules concerning the FSO. I know that our group was
hit by the AK and hope that we were not the one's to break any rules in the last FSO as I was not able to make last week's event. I check the logs and were on target before T-00:60 and had 10 pilots with a 11-15 comittment level, the only thing I do not know is their alt but they were told to climb to 23,500 and level out, this was to eleminate
going over the 24k alt cap.
 <S>
weiser
co/162ndFG"Purple*Hearts"
co/162ndFG"Purple*Hearts"
success doesn't always mean fun
but having fun is always successful

Offline Scca

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2718
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #22 on: April 20, 2015, 01:05:30 PM »
I won't name names, that's not the reason for this thread.  I will state again, my primary goal was to get the discussion going, perhaps get some thoughts on "standard" penalties that could be applied to the breaking of certain types of rules.  At this point, there is no transparency in the process.  Yes, we sent in films, were told in one case points would be adjusted (alt cap), and "we'll look into it" for the T+60 rule.  In neither case, was the penalty disclosed. 

In past FSO's, the penalties were made public.  While no one has to be named, all should be made aware that a penalty was applied, so all squads know they are being watched.  Don't want a penalty, don't mess up. 

So as to get more discussion going, how does this sound? 

Break a bomber alt cap, you lose 1% of the points that player gets for each 100 feet you are over the cap.  Cap is 20K, you are at 21K, you get a 10% reduction based on what you hit. 

If a squad or squads are assigned to hit a target, and they don't hit by T+60 for each minute late, you lose 1% of your points earned by hitting the target.  The clock stops for the whole squad as soon as bomb 1 destroys something. 

This way small mistakes carry small penalties, larger mistakes, carry larger ones. 

Thoughts?
Flying as AkMeathd - CO Arabian Knights
Working on my bbs cred one post at a time

http://www.arabian-knights.org

Offline Wiley

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8079
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #23 on: April 20, 2015, 01:29:08 PM »
I won't name names, that's not the reason for this thread.  I will state again, my primary goal was to get the discussion going, perhaps get some thoughts on "standard" penalties that could be applied to the breaking of certain types of rules.  At this point, there is no transparency in the process.  Yes, we sent in films, were told in one case points would be adjusted (alt cap), and "we'll look into it" for the T+60 rule.  In neither case, was the penalty disclosed. 

A couple of times in the last couple months I've noticed penalties mentioned in the frame summaries.  What more do you want?  I'd say they should just continue what they had done in the past as far as announcing what penalties were assessed to the allies and axis.  Makes sense to me to keep including it.

Quote
In past FSO's, the penalties were made public.  While no one has to be named, all should be made aware that a penalty was applied, so all squads know they are being watched.  Don't want a penalty, don't mess up. 

So as to get more discussion going, how does this sound? 

Break a bomber alt cap, you lose 1% of the points that player gets for each 100 feet you are over the cap.  Cap is 20K, you are at 21K, you get a 10% reduction based on what you hit. 

If a squad or squads are assigned to hit a target, and they don't hit by T+60 for each minute late, you lose 1% of your points earned by hitting the target.  The clock stops for the whole squad as soon as bomb 1 destroys something. 

This way small mistakes carry small penalties, larger mistakes, carry larger ones. 

Thoughts?

What are the current penalties?  Before discussion of what we think they should be, shouldn't we know what they currently are?  Also, if it's set up like the above, if I were so inclined, if I could be 5000 feet higher and have all my buffs get through to hit something for a 50% reduction in points, versus getting smacked on the way in and nobody dropping, guess which is more attractive from a score standpoint?

10 minutes is a long time in some of these scenarios.  Putting the interceptors out of sync by 10 minutes for a 10% drop in points would be worth it in a lot of cases.

Personally I like the 'Hit by T+60, or it doesn't count' of the current setup.  Why make it more granular than that?

I guess my point is-  What do you see is ineffective with the current setup, and why?  All I've seen is 'Change Must Be Made because you saw someone breaking the rules.'

Wiley.
If you think you are having a 1v1 in the Main Arena, your SA has failed you.

JG11

Offline -ammo-

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5124
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #24 on: April 20, 2015, 01:45:26 PM »
The offending squad must fly the next fso all three frames in the weakest bomber listed.

I mean this with the utmost respect - Stupid answer
Commanding Officer, 56 Fighter Group
Retired USAF - 1988 - 2011

Offline ROC

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7700
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #25 on: April 20, 2015, 01:47:37 PM »
Changed my mind, waiting for more discussion.
ROC
Nothing clever here.  Please, move along.

Offline captain1ma

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14384
      • JG54 website
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #26 on: April 20, 2015, 02:04:27 PM »
well since we're looking rule penalties, I say leave it to the CM's. if you ask the population about it, you get everything from taking off a few points, to banning for a week to public execution.

let the CM's deal with it and call it a day!

Offline Scca

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2718
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2015, 02:50:39 PM »
A couple of times in the last couple months I've noticed penalties mentioned in the frame summaries.  What more do you want?  I'd say they should just continue what they had done in the past as far as announcing what penalties were assessed to the allies and axis.  Makes sense to me to keep including it.
The genesis of this post was that there were no penalties applied to my knowledge in the bomber alt violation last month, and a less than enthusiastic response to a complaint filed this month regarding the T+60 rule.  What I want Wiley is clarity and transparently.  Maybe it's just my squad, but we keep getting hit by "oversights" of the rules.   With no action being taken, or action being taken but not disclosed, we are on the verge of having to lower our commitment due to the dissatisfaction of some of the squad members. 

Quote
What are the current penalties?  Before discussion of what we think they should be, shouldn't we know what they currently are?  Also, if it's set up like the above, if I were so inclined, if I could be 5000 feet higher and have all my buffs get through to hit something for a 50% reduction in points, versus getting smacked on the way in and nobody dropping, guess which is more attractive from a score standpoint?

10 minutes is a long time in some of these scenarios.  Putting the interceptors out of sync by 10 minutes for a 10% drop in points would be worth it in a lot of cases.
In the spirit of the event I hope those who look for loopholes would be few, but the "no disclosed penalties" policy creates the same problem, only worse (IMHO).

Quote
Personally I like the 'Hit by T+60, or it doesn't count' of the current setup.  Why make it more granular than that?
Personally I agree, but I sense the CM's don't want to hammer the entire squad for being just a few minutes late.  I guess it does seem a little draconian. 

Quote
I guess my point is-  What do you see is ineffective with the current setup, and why?
explained above

Quote
All I've seen is 'Change Must Be Made because you saw someone breaking the rules.'
Hopefully I have provided a little more than this here. 

well since we're looking rule penalties, I say leave it to the CM's. if you ask the population about it, you get everything from taking off a few points, to banning for a week to public execution.

let the CM's deal with it and call it a day!
And if they don't "deal" with it, what then?   Still call it a day?
Flying as AkMeathd - CO Arabian Knights
Working on my bbs cred one post at a time

http://www.arabian-knights.org

Offline Wiley

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8079
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #28 on: April 20, 2015, 03:17:17 PM »
The genesis of this post was that there were no penalties applied to my knowledge in the bomber alt violation last month, and a less than enthusiastic response to a complaint filed this month regarding the T+60 rule.  What I want Wiley is clarity and transparently.  Maybe it's just my squad, but we keep getting hit by "oversights" of the rules.   With no action being taken, or action being taken but not disclosed, we are on the verge of having to lower our commitment due to the dissatisfaction of some of the squad members.

Well, if seeing that there was a penalty applied makes you feel better, more power to you.
 
Quote
In the spirit of the event I hope those who look for loopholes would be few, but the "no disclosed penalties" policy creates the same problem, only worse (IMHO).

Well, IMHO putting in a canonized 'If this happens, this is the penalty' introduces a need for balancing, as I illustrated in my previous post.  The more rules you lay out, the more the rules lawyers have to work with. 'Did you mean ASL or AGL?!' type crap.

Quote
Personally I agree, but I sense the CM's don't want to hammer the entire squad for being just a few minutes late.  I guess it does seem a little draconian. 

I'm all for draconian when it comes to FSO.  As the title states, rules is rules.  There should be no positive outcome possible for bending the rules.  Squad limits aside, that's a completely different ball of wax.  No possible good outcome would occur if we start turning people away from events.

Quote
Hopefully I have provided a little more than this here. 

Clarity and transparency.  I guess it's not unreasonable.  Just not something I particularly give a damn about.  Would it really make your guys feel better to know that 20% of their bomber points didn't count on that run?  What difference does that make to your gameplay experience at the time?

So what comes next?  3 strikes and you're (squad is) out?

A system where the CM sees buffs above the limit and boots them from the arena a-la KOTH?

Is it really worth the witch hunting?

Wiley.
If you think you are having a 1v1 in the Main Arena, your SA has failed you.

JG11

Offline Scca

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2718
Re: Rulz is rulz...
« Reply #29 on: April 20, 2015, 04:01:49 PM »
Let me point you to the definition of which hunt



No which hunt sir. If that's not been clear,  I got nothing more  to offer. You keep trying to make this advsarial. Not sure why.
Flying as AkMeathd - CO Arabian Knights
Working on my bbs cred one post at a time

http://www.arabian-knights.org