Maybe that is the experience of some people, but I personally like these online campaigns. They create a narrative whithin which I can create stories and enjoy sharing them to the biggest possible audience. That is part of the hooby to create narrative content. Maybe there are ways to improve the point systeme. Maybe make it invisible and manually updated. Or limite the number of game per player to one or two a week. Trying to input a point system into a narrative campaign may be a bad idea to start with ...
Limiting the reports that much would mean a massive influx on the last day of a given week and practically nothing else between, and the factions with most players will win and we might as well replace the campaign with a poll to see what happens...
Right, instead of bringing quality to the top and adressing problems let's all just close our eyes and say again and again that "This is optional, this is optional, this is optional..."
But theres a difference between pissing and moaning over an online campaign and genuinely trying to improve it. In fact – look here in this thread and you'll see posts on either side of the spectrum. my two cents: The campaigns are neat, but kind of a lot of work to get the most fun out of it. It's really, really shitty when someone tries to undermine the system because then it feels like all that work was for nothing. Ultimately, I'm happy we have these but I wish CB would consider community suggestions, because I'm sure a lot of us have good ideas to improve the system or the campaign as a whole. Maybe it's time to make a thread on the Access Guide forum compiling ideas or just venting frustrations? I'm sure that would be more constructive and creative than just crapping all over JCJF's thread.
That would be sad... I would, however, note that it is non-PanO players coming in and flinging mud causing the issue. That said, please play whatever faction in whatever measure so you enjoy the campaign as much as possible.
I'm surprised folks are interested in "winning" something that's clearly meant as a truly casual experience. If you're deeply worried about Results, that's what ITS is for. I'm not advocating cheating, but I also think that caring so much about the behavior of individuals is pointless, especially with the notion that every faction probably has X number of people abusing the system anyway. I think the campaign's very much about narrative play, theme play, and community interaction. I'm excited about this thing because it's kinda silly. The ultra Try-Hard attitude is the kind of thing that gives tabletop systems a bad name.
No, the guy in question was banned, I was not. The important thing is that he never misrepresented anything, never cheated, but was banned from participating in Wotan and all future BoW events. If he's getting that treatment, and cheaters are being treated more carefully, that's wrong. HOW
Humans, in general, have a sense of fairness; that's why. It's not so much about winning, as playing in a game that isn't rigged.
I mean what I said. If he didn't cheat, everything's fine, but I am unconvinced at the moment, snapper.
Huh, didn't know about the past drama. But then again I barely did the last campaigns. I wonder if CB could solve this by making it more tied to Local events? Casual ones, with a warcor or non-participating player reporting all scores, results, and ITS accounts, while also uploading a pic or two of each game to show it happened. Then the players can log in and write a report if they want. It'd be a lot of work, but it'd also be more work to falsify compared to other methods. But at the same time, it would remove part of the casual feel. So I'm mixed on the idea.
I agree completely. And I think it's the true casual players who end up suffering at the hands of the try-hards. When you work really hard at posting quality batreps and see them down voted, that can rub guys the wrong way. When you have to deal with your faction crowing at you that "you should be playing against faction xxx, not faction yyy!", that can rub guys the wrong way. As to the cheating, or suspicion thereof, or whatever the heck you want to call it, I'm in agreement that it should not really be acceptable in the campaign. Clear expectations and a visible reporting structure are important components of the policing. Now, I can tell a tale of two "cheaters" here. One guy in our local meta got viciously called out during Kurage and it soured his experience around infinity tremendously. When the dust settled, it was a bunch of apophenic nerd police who couldn't wrap their heads around the fact that a father of three did not have time to post his reports until the weekend. Bad conclusion. On the flip side, community members see a different person accused of cheating, they see him admit to doing the wrong thing (if I'm remembering the apology correctly) and they then see his name dropped in an Infinity source book. Also a bad conclusion, but for different reasons. All this to say, I can understand completely when people say "heck no" to the next online campaign. Personally, I'd like to see a system that rewards quality over quantity when it comes to batreps, and common sense enforcement of reasonable rules that leaves the mob with no expectation that they need to be the "people's champions." But hey, I also wish I didn't have a meeting to go to right now. Ciao.
I really hope that's not what you ultimately decide. I'm genuinely sorry that this little shitstorm has impacted on you negatively, and was genuinely only trying to share a little narrative flavour to get those who are interested into the mood. But, if you will enjoy participating with another faction then I hope that you have a great time with them. Either way, I look forward to reading your reports. As to the whole "cheating" accusations, as @Vaulsc pointed out, I did make a couple of mistakes with uploading photos during the last campaign. Mistakes which I corrected when they were pointed out. It's possible that as a result of those errors those reports were disregarded from the final results, which I'm perfectly comfortable with, I've long advocated for a careful approach to the final vetting. I owned those errors, but the whole storm surrounding a user from another faction deliberately copying my old reports from previous campaigns and using them to create a series of fictional "games" in order to harm PanOceania as a faction was one of the most frustrating experiences I've ever had in thirty years of wargaming. That anyone would accuse me of doing something so stupid and harmful to the group I've so publicly advocated and defended is both confusing and offensive. As has been pointed out by other posters here, CB and BoW both actively ban individuals who take actions they deem unacceptable within their narrative events. Hopefully it's clear by now that my policy for managing the people who refuse to accept the reality of what happened (remembering that I'm also a Father of 3 children under 5, a teacher and a community coordinator with limited time) is simply to remove them from my forum experience. I'd thus point out simply that those people are not, and will not harm me but only other users. I'll continue to post related narrative material, and won't be paying too much mind to any other side-chat which happens.
So are you saying @cazboab is incorrect in saying that others were posting pics from your batreps before you used them yourself? Your explanation doesn't seem to allow for that.
