Multiple event hosting

[pascone]

i was gonna say what kim said

[kthx]

Man you people are morons, you are complaining because two people are hosting at the same time? Choose the event you want to play more and play it, if somebodies event gets ruined, then you can be sure he/she will decide to steal those players back one way or another, not only is this a way to increase hosting competitiveness but it is also a way to ensure that rare events, and new events are hosted/created. Before you complain about something perhaps you should think about the repurcussions the change would have on the whole instead of just "Now I can't play an event I like because im playing in an event I like just a little better". And Barton, it isn't just the event that makes people come to an event, the staffer has alot to do with it. Trenchwars is unfortunately entering the era of Newbishness, and the era of Vetness will be gone soon, I have seen this happen on another game also, The game has been around for a very long time, most of the vets who understand the games concept are gone, and newbies who have been playing for a year or two and think they understand the games concept completely toss around opinions based on their limited knowledge of the complicated details entailing running TW. Now usually these people would be rebuffed by older players telling them how moronic they are, but especially during the twld off-season when almost no real vets care about this game or zone their ideas seem somewhat better because there aren't 30 people with names that demand respect telling you how horrible of an idea it is. Just ignore these morons.

[Fluffz]

bullshit, this is totaly against rare events, cause when some1 hosts xtrench and someone else interreups with a twtown AD the game is dead, why would some1 host it in the first place?
look, if everyone only does what he is interested in his favourite thing will get boring (in everyones case). that is why egoism does not work. you have to force people to stay in xtrench (do things not everyone want as their 1st goal) before you host twtown to get the most joy or success for everyone. and this idea is not something i made up. people working together are more successful than people working against each other if you look at their total.

also with your egoistic point of view you cant understand that a runed event not only maked the staffer want to ruin the event of the staffer who stole his people, it also pisses of people. guess thats why we have this thread, no?

yes, it has been like this for ages, good point... maybe that worked when there were 600 pleople playing but nowerdays you have to be lucky to get 18 into an event at times. and a lot of pleople only play TW because of its events. and id rather not play 7v17 boki.

[Doc Flabby]

I'm not complaing about the lack of hosting mort hosting is good! my complaint was that some events need alot of people to be good, to enjoy playing them from my point of view . I wish i could remeber the two games that were hosted i think it was like ?go zombies and ?go warzone at the same time.....I think it was just that day or was me its all good at the moment

[Chao.]

bullshit, this is totaly against rare events, cause when some1 hosts xtrench and someone else interreups with a twtown AD the game is dead, why would some1 host it in the first place?
look, if everyone only does what he is interested in his favourite thing will get boring (in everyones case). that is why egoism does not work. you have to force people to stay in xtrench (do things not everyone want as their 1st goal) before you host twtown to get the most joy or success for everyone. and this idea is not something i made up. people working together are more successful than people working against each other if you look at their total.

also with your egoistic point of view you cant understand that a runed event not only maked the staffer want to ruin the event of the staffer who stole his people, it also pisses of people. guess thats why we have this thread, no?

yes, it has been like this for ages, good point... maybe that worked when there were 600 pleople playing but nowerdays you have to be lucky to get 18 into an event at times. and a lot of pleople only play TW because of its events. and id rather not play 7v17 boki.

Basing events tend to fail on their own, when one team is dominated the teams go lopsided rather fast. Most hosts don't even advert over each other at this point, I take full responsibility for doing it the past few days because it was mainly Left_Eye and I hosting, and neither one of us cared.

[Aquatiq]

Edit: taking it to private forum :/

[Fluffz]

Basing events tend to fail on their own, when one team is dominated the teams go lopsided rather fast. Most hosts don't even advert over each other at this point, I take full responsibility for doing it the past few days because it was mainly Left_Eye and I hosting, and neither one of us cared.

no need to take responsibility, its not such a big deal. u guys did good, and you could do better, thats all.

[genocidal]

Give the ERs a time window, say 4:00-8:00 EST since that's the busiest time usually, where up to two events can be hosted at once. Other than that, keep the same old rule (that I had assumed was still being enforced) that you can't host one event until the other is done.

[kthx]

Aquatiq are you implying you are taking this issue to private staff forums to whine, and basically going over the players heads and trying to get something ridiculous done about something that isn't a problem?

Genocidal, there was never a rule about overlapping hosting, it used to be done back in the olden days just because staff wasn't a bunch of whiny bitches who cried when they lost a few players back then I suppose. Times change but FFS look at the big picture for once in your lives, I will try to explain this situation one more time.

Host A hosts Hunt and gets 30 players.
Host B hosts Warpwars and gets 40 players while stealing 15 of Host A's 30 players.
Host A (in a friendly manner since ER's shouldn't be emo) says "you are going down host B!"
Host A hosts Golden Gun and gets 60 people while stealing 25 of host B's 40 players.
Host B says "Oh yeah!" and hosts Balance Zombies getting 100 players and stealing 40 of host A's 60 players.

So as you can see when you have ER's who aren't extremely emo about losing fair and square in a hosting duel it increases the amount of hosts, and the originality of hosts. The whole point of this is showing up your enemy in the duel by hosting an event that is so fun, or so rare that the players won't leave it for their event.

[Chao.]

Aquatiq are you implying you are taking this issue to private staff forums to whine, and basically going over the players heads and trying to get something ridiculous done about something that isn't a problem?

Genocidal, there was never a rule about overlapping hosting, it used to be done back in the olden days just because staff wasn't a bunch of whiny bitches who cried when they lost a few players back then I suppose. Times change but FFS look at the big picture for once in your lives, I will try to explain this situation one more time.

Host A hosts Hunt and gets 30 players.
Host B hosts Warpwars and gets 40 players while stealing 15 of Host A's 30 players.
Host A (in a friendly manner since ER's shouldn't be emo) says "you are going down host B!"
Host A hosts Golden Gun and gets 60 people while stealing 25 of host B's 40 players.
Host B says "Oh yeah!" and hosts Balance Zombies getting 100 players and stealing 40 of host A's 60 players.

So as you can see when you have ER's who aren't extremely emo about losing fair and square in a hosting duel it increases the amount of hosts, and the originality of hosts. The whole point of this is showing up your enemy in the duel by hosting an event that is so fun, or so rare that the players won't leave it for their event.

I think it's more that someone might host at a not so busy time and barely get enough to make it fun, 23-25 people, and then someone hosts over THAT, and they're left with 13 people to play an event in.

I welcome the competition but sometimes its just stupid how few people are in each event like that.

[Kolar]

There's no definitive answer to this. When for example Event Ref-A is hosting warzone with very few people and the game demands a minimum population, as a courtesy Event Ref-B could wait until it's over or just before because 1: It will kill the current game and 2: More then likely the new event will not get enough players 3: Event Ref-A will likely go afk or close Continuum for the night. I can't see upper staff making up a rule for something like this, it's more of a thing the <ER>s will have to work out but- it should be open to competition when we have a good number of people to support either event strongly.

[Aquatiq]

Aquatiq are you implying you are taking this issue to private staff forums to whine, and basically going over the players heads and trying to get something ridiculous done about something that isn't a problem?

Um.. no.
This is what I posted:

you know what never mind, about the other hosting thread (name) I can't make you change your mind. and it just wouldn't be worth it. none of you are being paid to host. I'm done.

*shrugs* sorry I couldn't accommodate you.

I never thought to see it the way Kim did, that it provides an alternative for players who don't like a certain event that's happening. That seems to make the most sense among all these theories being thrown into the pot.

Host A hosts Hunt and gets 30 players.
Host B hosts Warpwars and gets 40 players while stealing 15 of Host A's 30 players.
Host A (in a friendly manner since ER's shouldn't be emo) says "you are going down host B!"
Host A hosts Golden Gun and gets 60 people while stealing 25 of host B's 40 players.
Host B says "Oh yeah!" and hosts Balance Zombies getting 100 players and stealing 40 of host A's 60 players.

Of course, that'd be ideal, but it doesn't seem very realistic imo. Haven't seen too many instances of something like that happening. Just seen events dying. Don't think there's enough enthusiasm for that to happen right now.*shrugs*

[Twerp]

If only they hosted this much in the summer, when everyone wasn't so busy...

I personally like the amount being hosted (except I play every game which hurts me doing homework :P). A lot of events that aren't hosted much are getting some attention.

[Fusha]

Omg, hosting two events at the same time is very very bad. Say, there's 2 events hosted. half of the people like this event, half of the people like that event. so what do we get? only 20 people are playing both events, which isn't as fun as 40 people playing this event first, and after it's over, 40 people playing that event. Which is better for a random event player? Play ONE event that isn't as fun, or play TWO events that are fun with lots of people? It should be illegal to host while another event is on.

You guys either not host anything at all, either host everything at the same time :P

[Wormhole Surfer]

...

but when people want to host something, and they have to go soon, well then they need to host it now.

...or they could just logoff and not ruin another ref's event just because they feel that their personal time is more important than anyone else's and that their event is so important that it doesn't matter if someone else's event is ruined as a result. If someone is regularly finding that they "have to go soon" so they can't host their event without interfering with another, then that person probably shouldn't be a ref anyway.

...not to mention the fact that it hurts the player turnouts for both events, as has already been mentioned.