Multiple event hosting

[dads revenge]

multiple hosts are fine as long as the zone population supports it otherwise its kind of a waste. A simple thing to do would be :#bots:!games to see whats being hosted and then esc a to see where the general population is before starting another event but if there are tons of ppl around there is no reason why multiple events can't be done at the same time.

[D1st0rt]

I don't know who you are, but I hope for the sake of tw you don't represent the rest of the staff.

NOT ANYMORE LOLEZ

[Kawrae]

Most of current <ER>s suck and are inactive homos

[Wormhole Surfer]

...

Be quiet moron.

I don't know who you are, but I hope for the sake of tw you don't represent the rest of the staff.

[Reaver]

...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.

Actually if you took a less pessimistic point of view then you'd be much more correct about the way things are. There are <ER>'s that are nice enough to another <ER> to say, "Hey, Im hosting this game but since you want to host that game before you go and Im almost done, why don't you go ahead and start." An <ER> that believed their personal time is more important than everyone else's wouldn't even be an <ER> at all, the whole point of being an <ER>, like every other staff position, is that you are volunteering your time and effort.

[kthx]

...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.

Be quiet moron.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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*

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.