Bushtarion Forums

Bushtarion Forums (http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/index.php)
-   Gripes (http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   No Leaders (http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4416)

Twigley 31-05-2010 07:05 PM

No Leaders
 
There are no decent leaders that play FTW anymore.
Sort it out and start making cores of 7/8 of you that play together every round.
I've had literally 8-10 top class solid players ask me for an alliance this round + 15-20 active average players who need some guidance.
Cheers.
/Gripe

Dark_Angel 31-05-2010 07:46 PM

We're getting to the stage now where ideas like Martin's are a must if we're to have a decent round. We don't have enough FTW leaders - in part due to the fact that getting 20 good players is actually quite difficult nowadays. I think a lot of people would rather not lead at all rather than go at it half arsed.

As has already been discussed in that thread we need admin involvement for this kind of thing to take off - Something Azzer seems to have ruled out.

Can't see things getting any better without a big change.

No-Dachi 31-05-2010 09:09 PM

Tbh, if people would just follow Twigleys post it wouldn't matter if they would go all in or FTW at all. What this game needs are core groups - groups that battle for rankings every round. A home for players, and a training ground for new blood. With a decent core the ally would not disband if they got bashed, and if some "new" players leave them for a better ranked alliance, they would get another player in that they could teach - spreading vital game knowledge throughout the playerbase.

Yes, idea's like Martins are good, and will do a lot to improve gameplay, but I don't see that as the future for this game. People need to find a home - they need to play with people they know, and for a new player to end up with a new alliance each round - without any chance of helping out his mate from the previous round, he's less likely to stay around. This is the solution for old-time players looking for something new - and for that it works well. Just don't mistake it for a solution that will salvage the game - with or without admin help. That work lies in our hands entirely.

Twigley 01-06-2010 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark_Angel (Post 60412)
getting 20 good players is actually quite difficult nowadays.

No it's not.

Steve_God 01-06-2010 07:53 AM

The main reason is there are lots of players like me (I could probably list about 20/30 or so) who are all the types of players with the skill and knowledge to help take an alliance to Rank 1 and hold it out for the round, but just don't have the time (either due to work/uni/etc...) to do it each and every round for the whole three months, and instead just play "half-arsed" due to other time commitments.

There's nothing any game mechanic can do about that - and looking at it from the bigger picture, it allows others who haven't been part of a 'Rank 1 core' before, make their own when the new big leaders start emerging.

Lets face it, there have been many many 'cores' of players at the top, many of who have come and gone at some point or merged into others (the 3 main 'old school' ones that come to mind are Angelas Crew, the Dutchies and BlackWolfs gang.).

New ones will come around :)

IceOfFire 01-06-2010 09:06 AM

People just need to give it ago! I have led around 5 FTW alliances and co lead a further 3! People just need to be willing to step up and try to give it ago! If you fail, does it matter? You still had fun trying to do it!!

The only reason i did it, was because i couldn't find anyone who was leading, my alliance that round got to rank 2! People just need to take the plunge!


With the permission ability now, it is so much easier to share the responsibility!! In my last 3 alliances, between 2-5 people have had most abilities and all had a say in how the alliance is run. If two or three people get together and try to lead together the stress and responsibility is so much easier to bare!

Davs 01-06-2010 12:05 PM

I see your point, Twigs, but I can't help feeling that this thread won't help anything. As you've said (or at least implied) there are plenty of good players around, but a lot of them are newer and possibly lack the confidence to give it a go as leading Rank 1. I can't help feeling that this thread is going to be counter-productive.

Alvestein 01-06-2010 12:55 PM

My core is usually composed of lazy others like me...most of whom quit :P

Silence 01-06-2010 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceOfFire (Post 60430)
People just need to give it ago! I have led around 5 FTW alliances and co lead a further 3! People just need to be willing to step up and try to give it ago! If you fail, does it matter? You still had fun trying to do it!!

The only reason i did it, was because i couldn't find anyone who was leading, my alliance that round got to rank 2! People just need to take the plunge!


With the permission ability now, it is so much easier to share the responsibility!! In my last 3 alliances, between 2-5 people have had most abilities and all had a say in how the alliance is run. If two or three people get together and try to lead together the stress and responsibility is so much easier to bare!

Yeah you give your co leaders ability to ensure that a "leader" is always online but when you are not online there is CONSTANT b1tching "WHERE WERE YOU" "ZOMG WE COULDNT DO ANYTHING CAUSE YOU WERENT HERE"

Yeah Im bitter IoF, you b4stard :'( (Yeah okay I appreciate that I was pretty bad as I would just disappear for hours at a time but hey, I never even wanted to lead! And when you make a core, they were in my case the first to to decide to leave. B4stards!!!!!)

Aside from my stab at IoF (I <3 him really ofc) I think the main problem is the b1tching. There is too much demand on a leader and when one considers the pros of leading, I cant see anything =P

Far too much stress organising the whining and the b1tching. Something which most people just cba with in a game so just dont bother and latch onto someone who is willing to put up with it.

Finally I find that ship jumping is a big problem. People just cba to stick with a group, even if that group gets along fine, but when sh1t storm comes people would rather take the easy option and run to an alliance with isnt going to sink - but this really supports the first point, too much stress, no real gain.

If you cant be bothered to read the waffle summary:

People dont want to lead because it is far too stressful and too much b1tchng and whining. There is no plus side to leading so it is just logical to let someone else do it. (or in my case get pushed into it, fcuk you IoF =P)

Dark_Angel 02-06-2010 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twigley (Post 60423)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark_Angel (Post 60412)
getting 20 good players is actually quite difficult nowadays.

No it's not.

x4/5, it is. Evidently. Else we'd have far more competitive alliances on the go.

-

Silence has hit the nail on the head, pretty much.

I don't know if leading is just a really uninteresting aspect of Bush these days though. Times are a' changing, people don't like getting more stress from a game than enjoyment.

And leading does tend to be a stressful experience. (more so FTW) Its incredibly time consuming and people just don't seem to have the time. Put on top of that the fact that rounds seem to end sooner and sooner these days, and you've got an environment in which people just can't be buggered to put in effort for very little chance of a good, competitive round. (in which, especially lately, a handful of individuals can very easily manipulate for their own lolz at the expense of everyone else)

Davs 02-06-2010 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davs (Post 60436)
I can't help feeling that this thread is going to be counter-productive.

Just thought I'd bring this up again, given the route this thread has taken.

Don't try to put people off leading if you're worried about a lack of leaders. Try to be more positive.

Polo 02-06-2010 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No-Dachi (Post 60414)
What this game needs are core groups - groups that battle for rankings every round.

Agreed. I miss ViruS v Dutchies (even if they did cheat) v Core v Martin's group. This game needs real rivalry again, imo.

atsanjose 03-06-2010 06:59 AM

the game needs less backstabbing :)

Alvestein 03-06-2010 11:56 AM

i say we create cores! give a teenie boost for being in cores. cores ftw! it sounds fun ^___^

Twigley 03-06-2010 02:57 PM

Make your own core's.
Dont rely on others to do it.

My first round leading to the next 3 times i had the same 10 members with me with other additions.

The next time around leading i made a new core with 3/4 of my originals and a few new ones (Quicksilver, Joe2727, Dre, John etc). God i'd never even heard of Quicksilver and Joe2727 before but if you got some nice leadership and players around then you create imo the best people in the game atm (Which i think QS and Joe are).

I'd advise people just to start with maybe 5/6 strong active players. Those 5/6 players should go POM and just block every inc that you get then you should recruit not based purely on names and past experience, but on players who are willing to learn the game.

I strongly urge people to do this ;_;
Else the people who usually form cores will stop doing it because there is no competition.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.