Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Scca on April 15, 2015, 01:04:57 PM
-
I thought I would address this with the FSO community to see what you folks think.
FSO is a different beast than the MA. In FSO each scenario comes with it a set of rules that most times are adhered to. Most squads work within the rules provided, but in the last two months my squad has been presented with two instances where the rules were broken. Once it was a bomber alt cap, the other was a violation of the hit target by T+60 rule.
My question is, how best are these situations handled (points penalties? etc) in the communities opinion? The CM's have their opinion, I want to know what the participants think. Perhaps if we as a group can come to some sort of understanding, and present it as a "crowd sourced" opinion, there will be an expectation that it is acceptable to everyone (most everyone anyway), and it can be followed.
-
The best thing to do is film it and send it to the CM's and let them handle it.
-
Most of the time, in the two examples you listed, the punishment is simply a point deduction from the final score. If a specific squad repeatedly violates the rules, then the punishment is usually more severe. Most of the time, these two rules don't get broken on purpose. It's usually an accident when a bomber goes over the alt limit, or the strike doesn't make it to target on time.
-
Most of the time, in the two examples you listed, the punishment is simply a point deduction from the final score.
That's part of why I am posting this, I'm not seeing it. There seems to be a reluctance to apply penalties.
It's usually an accident when a bomber goes over the alt limit, or the strike doesn't make it to target on time.
I agree to an extent. I am not talking about 100 feet over the limit or 1 person over commitment, I am talking about 4,000 feet over the limit or several over commitment. That is a result of poor planning, and a blatant disregard for the rules.
If we could all agree on how penalties be applied (small error, small penalty, big error, BIG penalty), then it's transparent, and expected.
-
That's part of why I am posting this, I'm not seeing it. There seems to be a reluctance to apply penalties.
I agree to an extent. I am not talking about 100 feet over the limit or 1 person over commitment, I am talking about 4,000 feet over the limit or several over commitment. That is a result of poor planning, and a blatant disregard for the rules.
If we could all agree on how penalties be applied (small error, small penalty, big error, BIG penalty), then it's transparent, and expected.
I agree with these points except the squad commitment - especially when a squad is over the limit. I will never tell a squaddie that they can't fly if they show up.. And I know I'm not alone when I say that.
-
153 views, 4 comments :headscratch:.
I guess the FSO community doesn't give a hoot about staying true to the rules, much less the spirit of the rules.
At least I know the AK's will continue to do their level best and hope the CM's will take infractions seriously and have some backbone when it comes to imposing sanctions against those who fail at basic reading comprehension.
We enjoy FSO and take it very seriously. It's sad that other squads bring their MA mentality to this special event. Bombing towns to get their name in lights (even though no points are awarded), leaving your bombers to attack an inbound strike you happen across, ignoring orders and free lancing when you are assigned an escort mission and flying your bombers in at 19K when the cap is 15K makes it hard to have fun some days.
-
I was kind of holding my comments in hopes there would be more discussion.
I will chime in as soon as I can.
-
It's sad that other squads bring their MA mentality to this special event.
I agree whole heartedly. I find the actions of a few egocentric morons very quickly ruin the tone of an event (scenarios in particular), and I am very hesitant to take part in any events.
There is a strong backbone of good people that do the events, but a few bad eggs can do a lot of damage.
-
LilMak has the reigns for the 56th in FSO - I know he has turned squaddies away to stay under our commitment. We have been dinged for that.
I agree with SCCA - this is NOT the MA. Leaders need to ensure their members understand this.
-
I think being 1 or 2 over a commiment is ok. More players mean more action. As for breaking rules yes I agree the punishments should be doled out. But CM's may be worried about running people out of FSO also. So it is a 2 edged sword in a way. We need all the people we can get but also want people that are going to follow the rules. A whole squad breaking the alt caps or not hitting targets on time are not good for FSO so it may be better if they weren't.
We have the rules in place for a reason and people should not think that the rules don't apply to them just because of who or what squad they are with.
:airplane: :salute
-
why send your squaddies away? Send them to a squad that has open slots to be filled. There are always squads with open slots.
-
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.
-
153 views, 4 comments :headscratch:.
I guess the FSO community doesn't give a hoot about staying true to the rules, much less the spirit of the rules.
At least I know the AK's will continue to do their level best and hope the CM's will take infractions seriously and have some backbone when it comes to imposing sanctions against those who fail at basic reading comprehension.
We enjoy FSO and take it very seriously. It's sad that other squads bring their MA mentality to this special event. Bombing towns to get their name in lights (even though no points are awarded), leaving your bombers to attack an inbound strike you happen across, ignoring orders and free lancing when you are assigned an escort mission and flying your bombers in at 19K when the cap is 15K makes it hard to have fun some days.
last week I was thinking the allied Bombers where too high and was gonna bitc...err whine about it..... :D
but they were well within max ALT....of 24K at 19K
-
We are walking a balancing act these days in fso. We need players yet if we bend the rules to far we lose our integrity that makes fso the best thing in AH.
like pliss said long gone are the days when to many peps was a problem i can see nothing being said about squads going over a frame or 2. But if we do start
to ignore what the cm's set as the frame work of the scenario then we really have no rules and fso is gone. On a personal note what seems missing from the main is respect of fellow players best thing about fso is that respect is present here. Bottom line to me is it is up to us to make sure we follow the main hard rules <sure some drunk squaddie gonna pop another 1 someone lets extra in psssh who cares> but when its 24k we honor that if fighters have a no fly line we honor it. We always have been self policing I imagine we always will.<S>
-
The simple answer is if you film it, send it to the CMs. They send email to the squad in violation and get it corrected internally. :police:
Believe me, we all care.
My film was sent in tonight! :cheers:
:rock
SlipKnoT
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
The offending squad must fly the next fso all three frames in the weakest bomber listed.
-
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
-
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"
-
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?
-
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.
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.
-
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
-
Changed my mind, waiting for more discussion.
-
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!
-
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.
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).
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.
I guess my point is- What do you see is ineffective with the current setup, and why?
explained above
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?
-
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.
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.
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.
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.
-
Let me point you to the definition of which hunt (http://i.word.com/idictionary/witch%20hunt)
(http://m.quickmeme.com/img/f6/f67334bc58f2468bad15312669d5edaa0afe4c44de4eb56039994a47f00d296b.jpg)
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.
-
I only used it once, but all right, let's play this out.
They publish a set of canonized rules- Infraction X yields penalty Y.
Tonight, squad x breaks the rules, penalties are levied. Everybody gets to see that their side had a penalty of 20 points levied against them.
Next frame, squad x breaks the rules, penalties are levied. Everybody gets to see that their side had a penalty of 20 points levied against them.
Next frame, squad x breaks the rules, penalties are levied. Everybody gets to see that their side had a penalty of 20 points levied against them.
Now what?
Wiley.
-
I only used it once, but all right, let's play this out.
They publish a set of canonized rules- Infraction X yields penalty Y.
Tonight, squad x breaks the rules, penalties are levied. Everybody gets to see that their side had a penalty of 20 points levied against them.
Next frame, squad x breaks the rules, penalties are levied. Everybody gets to see that their side had a penalty of 20 points levied against them.
Next frame, squad x breaks the rules, penalties are levied. Everybody gets to see that their side had a penalty of 20 points levied against them.
Now what?
Wiley.
Is this a rhetorical question?
If not, uh, nothing?? My wish was granted?
-
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. <S>
weiser
co/162ndFG"Purple*Hearts"
My film showed you guys below 24k. Good run 162nd <S>
-
Is this a rhetorical question?
If not, uh, nothing?? My wish was granted?
So you're saying people aren't going to start wondering 'Hey, who were those guys that cost us those 20 points?'
Followed by, 'Hey, you guys sent in the film, who was it?'
Followed by, 'We don't want them on our side anymore.'
It will happen, so it may as well all be transparent. The CMs should post who did it, what was done, maybe a link to the film so all can see. Then it's all clear and transparent and everybody knows who to blame. Anything less will just sow suspicion and conspiracy theories about who's costing their side points and why.
Wiley.
-
So you're saying people aren't going to start wondering 'Hey, who were those guys that cost us those 20 points?'
Followed by, 'Hey, you guys sent in the film, who was it?'
Followed by, 'We don't want them on our side anymore.'
It will happen, so it may as well all be transparent. The CMs should post who did it, what was done, maybe a link to the film so all can see. Then it's all clear and transparent and everybody knows who to blame. Anything less will just sow suspicion and conspiracy theories about who's costing their side points and why.
Wiley.
That sir would be the witch hunt you accused me of, and up to the CM's to handle.
-
That sir would be the witch hunt you accused me of, and up to the CM's to handle.
Well since you don't trust them to handle it, what is the option?
We need clarity and transparency right?
Wiley.
-
Well since you don't trust them to handle it, what is the option?
We need clarity and transparency right?
Wiley.
:headscratch: still in with the hostility. Sorry you don't feel accountability is important.
-
:headscratch: still in with the hostility. Sorry you don't feel accountability is important.
No particular hostility, I'm just confused how it is you want to know who did what, and what the penalty was, but somehow that doesn't result in a witch hunt?
You're basically saying the CMs aren't doing their jobs, so to verify that, obviously we need all the information to confirm that they are doing it properly right?
Wiley.
-
No particular hostility, I'm just confused how it is you want to know who did what, and what the penalty was, but somehow that doesn't result in a witch hunt?
You're basically saying the CMs aren't doing their jobs, so to verify that, obviously we need all the information to confirm that they are doing it properly right?
Wiley.
No, YOU want to know who, I want to know THAT. SMH
Now, get off my leg. I'm done with you. It's clear you can't have an adult conversation.
-
Changed my mind, waiting for more discussion.
PM sent
-
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....
The CMs have taken the position that preserving the flexibility of our response to infractions is better than painstakingly delineating every minute detail of the rules and their consequences. I agree with that position. Rather than focus on meting out punishment, we would much rather have a quiet, private discussion with the folks who might have erred and discretely try to avoid the rules being violated again. And in my experience it's a process that works.
As always, FSO pilots are encouraged to send film to the CMs whenever a rules violation is seen or even merely suspected. I guarantee you that we do take those emails seriously.
:salute
-
Okay, swing and a miss... At this point all I can ask is if you see a rules violation report it. Perhaps if it becomes a habit, then something will be done. Until then, I will balance my participation in the event against my perception of how seriously it's being taken by the folks in charge.
Thanks for the input guys and gals.
-
The CMs have taken the position that preserving the flexibility of our response to infractions is better than painstakingly delineating every minute detail of the rules and their consequences. I agree with that position. Rather than focus on meting out punishment, we would much rather have a quiet, private discussion with the folks who might have erred and discretely try to avoid the rules being violated again. And in my experience it's a process that works.
As always, FSO pilots are encouraged to send film to the CMs whenever a rules violation is seen or even merely suspected. I guarantee you that we do take those emails seriously.
:salute
Your getting into good ol' boys club here. People see things going on and don't see things being done to them they'll think it's either OK, or this guy knows somebody or that squads been around to long to punish...or etc. etc.
When and if you post the scores for a frame you should post: 10 point deduction because squad x took off in 4 different types of aircraft, 50 point reduction due to squad Y blatantly over the alt. cap....
Oh, and no more suicide missions in He111's and other undergunned bombers. If B17's get formations ALL bombers should get formations that can.
-
A little bit of self-reporting could go a long way.
If a bomber strike is not paying attention to T+60 for time on target (from planning to execution), then there is a more basic problem with regard to reading and understanding the rules. Nobody here is looking to cast blame, but to, among other things, review the effectiveness of the overall orders (as written in the FSO write ups). If the rules are well-written, and almost all of them are, then the problem might lay elsewhere. I would like to see the T+60 rule restated in EVERY write up where air-to-ground is employed...and perhaps a warning about perceived altitudes vs. altitudes recorded by the logs.
The original post was about reinforcing the rules through some clearly stated and well communicated 'consequences' that apply to everybody - every time.
This is not to imply that there have been intentional breaches of enforcement. This is about the certainty of consequences for rule violations BEFORE they occur.
All my opinion, of course. My squadron mates are smarter than I am.
With respect,
:salute
-
Your getting into good ol' boys club here. People see things going on and don't see things being done to them they'll think it's either OK, or this guy knows somebody or that squads been around to long to punish...or etc. etc.
As long as someone is in charge of the rules, there can always be an allegation that there is a good old boy club. That is addressed on the very first day of Roc's training. When you become a CM, the standards for player conduct go way, way up. Trust me, CM's go above and beyond to maintain fairness. When I am setup, I usually see both sides objectives. I may or may not see both sides Orders. We communicate this TO NO ONE (especially the members of my squad or any other squad). Any CM in the arena can fly in God's eye and watch things unfold. Every CM in the arena (and FSO attracts alot) sees any action taken by a CM. Any action by a CM is always discussed and reviewed among ourselves. If necessary, we are judged on our actions. If we mess up as CMs and we are lucky, we are disciplined by our team. At the top of our team is a guy called Skuzzy. If he has to be involved, the discipline is only needed once.
-
As long as someone is in charge of the rules, there can always be an allegation that there is a good old boy club. That is addressed on the very first day of Roc's training. When you become a CM, the standards for player conduct go way, way up. Trust me, CM's go above and beyond to maintain fairness. When I am setup, I usually see both sides objectives. I may or may not see both sides Orders. We communicate this TO NO ONE (especially the members of my squad or any other squad). Any CM in the arena can fly in God's eye and watch things unfold. Every CM in the arena (and FSO attracts alot) sees any action taken by a CM...
Thanks for refreshing this information for those of us that have been around for awhile and de-mystifying the CM role for those that are newer.
I will add this - Anything resembling a regularly scheduled event outside of the normal arenas would simply not exist without a group of volunteers to administrate it and keep it alive. These events are not part of the monthly financial arrangement with HiTech Creations. Fortunately the Aces High community is gifted with a small number of folks that do a buttload of work to keep all the parts working. I know this poster was not trolling for compliments and I'm not giving one - just stating a fact. I've had a peek at the inside of the CM world as a trainee. It became quite clear that I needed to get a lot more of my life in order before I could make the commitment they have. If there is a society in place with the CMs it's based on dedication to doing the job correctly and commitment to hard work.
The problem with perceptions is that the all the factors are seldom visible. No mysterious CMs here, move along.
:salute
-
Thanks for refreshing this information for those of us that have been around for awhile and de-mystifying the CM role for those that are newer.
I will add this - Anything resembling a regularly scheduled event outside of the normal arenas would simply not exist without a group of volunteers to administrate it and keep it alive. These events are not part of the monthly financial arrangement with HiTech Creations. Fortunately the Aces High community is gifted with a small number of folks that do a buttload of work to keep all the parts working. I know this poster was not trolling for compliments and I'm not giving one - just stating a fact. I've had a peek at the inside of the CM world as a trainee. It became quite clear that I needed to get a lot more of my life in order before I could make the commitment they have. If there is a society in place with the CMs it's based on dedication to doing the job correctly and commitment to hard work.
The problem with perceptions is that the all the factors are seldom visible. No mysterious CMs here, move along.
:salute
Oh, I wasn't implying there is a ol' boys club, just that it could be perceived. I as well as most folks know these guys do a lot of unsung work for nothing more than a free account here and there. $15 a month is short pay for the time most of them put in. That being said, they asked for opinions...or someone did. That was mine. When a rule is broken, you don't have to be an azhat about it, just put it down with the score. I've seen a few that I thought were reported up the chain that never got deducted, like 2 squads on the same side taking off in 3 different types of aircraft in the same frame. From what I've been told that's a no-no. Never heard a word about it. Then again, I'm not sure the scores for that month were ever posted, kinda like this ones looking.