Multiple event hosting

[Doc Flabby]

I donno if this is just annoying me but can one event be left to finish before adverting another event as it kills the first event

[wavebeamer]

I have noticed this more as of late as well, but I'm not going to mention any names here.

Come on, if a host is in the middle of hosting something, don't ad until they are finished. It really shouldn't be that difficult to figure out whether something is being hosted or not at the time. When I see someone hosting an event with 35 people and then lose 15 of them because someone else just interrupted with an ad, I see that as disrespectful to the previous host. It can also ruin the fun of the previous event.

There are also those who want to play both events, but when the previous event is over, the other has already started anyway!

[Mootland Farmer]

You don't see this as a way to increase the competitiveness of hosts? The best host will draw the better crowd right?

[wavebeamer]

Well, there are some exceptions to my opinion, I suppose (i.e., a really slow and boring to watch game is finishing up, 2 players are still duking it out, and a new event is advertised). Competitiveness may not always be bad, so to speak, but the events are about the people who play it moreso than anything else. In most cases, more people = more fun. Also, I've heard far more complaining about overlapping events as opposed to praise for more options.

[Cumulonimbus]

I'm all for the more events...it is more likely to bring more people to trench wars, rather than not hosting at all...but lately I have only seen two dedicated ER's. Chao and Left_Eye. Aparrently there have been 8 promotions to ER recently...where are the other 6 not to mention the others that were previously ER?

[Aquatiq]

You don't see this as a way to increase the competitiveness of hosts? The best host will draw the better crowd right?

No offense, but no one besides the smods really have any reason to care who the best hosts are. If people find it inconvenient that they are missing some of their favorite events because they happen simultaneously, what's so difficult about waiting 10 more minutes to advert? What's good about the ERs trying to cram in as many hosts as they can? Is 2 games of 20 people each really more desirable than 1 game with 40 people?

[Fluffz]

true

the advertbot should also wait with the ad until base, and tourney is over and not allow it to be started until the event is over

[Kim]

Sorry its been like this since forever. Chances that both events are your favorite events of all time, everytime, is pretty slim. Also if the event was great, there is also the chance that it will be re-hosted later. Then instead of going to say TWCity, you can go into your favorite game of glider despite them being hosted at the same time. You also have to think about the players who don't like, say Zombie events, if there is more than 1 hosted at the same time, this allows choice, not restriction.

[Twerp]

the advertbot should also wait with the ad until base, and tourney is over and not allow it to be started until the event is over

?

Base and tourny are automatically hosted. If you miss it the first game to go play an event, there almost always is a game right after base/tourny is over. So you can basically play tourny or base whenever.

[Pressure Drop]

No offense, but no one besides the smods really have any reason to care who the best hosts are. If people find it inconvenient that they are missing some of their favorite events because they happen simultaneously, what's so difficult about waiting 10 more minutes to advert? What's good about the ERs trying to cram in as many hosts as they can? Is 2 games of 20 people each really more desirable than 1 game with 40 people?

Agreed

it would benifit both events to start the second event immediately after the first one finishes. When i've seen this happen there is a big migration off players from the first event instead of dividing them between the first and second.

You don't see this as a way to increase the competitiveness of hosts? The best host will draw the better crowd right?

nope i don't see it like that , i see it as pontentialy ruining the first event and getting a weak run at the second. I also don't think that hosts should be competeing against each other for macho hosty points but working together in a TW utopia






anyways i'm not staff but i'm pretty sure you guys have a chat, is it that hard to go ; is anyone curently hosting anything i'm about to host chocobo !!

[Barton]

To Moot: it is not the best host that gets most ppl, it is the event...

To Fluffz: do u know how long we have to wait to get an ad if a host is allrdy hosting??? it takes ages & u want to add more time??

To Aquatiq: 10mins more??? we have to wait long enough, if someone is 3rd in line to host an event he needs to wait +/- 40-55mins & u want to add there more time to it?

"What's good about the ERs trying to cram in as many hosts as they can? Is 2 games of 20 people each really more desirable than 1 game with 40 people?"

It is called competition, competition = many hosts

[Fluffz]

sorry, but when i am online there are NEVER 3 people in line waiting to host something. IF i am lucky there is one event every one, two hours and chances are good i play ?go base where i shouldnt just leave.

make it in a way the host can choose if he wants his ad as soon as possible or timed with base and tourney and therefore more fun and with more people.

however, thats not gona happen. but you could at least ask if someone is hosting something atm, and wait till its finished.

if for example some basing style map is hosted and another AD flashes up the losing team leaves. i dont see the positive side of that.

[Aquatiq]

I see the competition in getting points on the tw.org stats bragging rights, but I don't see any competition for quality. *shrugs*

[D1st0rt]

I see the competition in getting points on the tw.org stats bragging rights, but I don't see any competition for quality. *shrugs*

That's because there IS no competition for quality

gg pwnt ez

[Reaver]

People were only recently complaining that there wasn't enough hosting going on. Now there are complaints that too much hosting is going on (at the same time). People will complain no matter what, but Im glad that they're complaining about too much hosting rather than too little. I know in the perfect situation all the staffers that want to host would wait in line, but when people want to host something, and they have to go soon, well then they need to host it now.