1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

What to do if a FAQ ruling is clearly wrong?

Discussion in 'Rules' started by Hecaton, Jul 8, 2019.

Tags:
  1. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    3,897
    It weakens their point to people who aren't approaching the argument in good faith, sure. If that's CB then we're all in trouble.
     
  2. A Mão Esquerda

    A Mão Esquerda Deputy Hexahedron Officer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,599
    I agree, they ought to try and find valuable points where ever they may come from, just as forum users should make those points as simple and pleasant to add to the data as possible. Additionally, it's true that CB could improve their communication, especially even if to say to players, "no, we're not going to do it that way." It seems (to me, at least) that one of the pitfalls is forum users assuming they have all of the needed information, and then assuming that, since they do, they have the perfect solution. The reality is that we will never have all of the information needed, and would be fools to either assume we do or that we will. That measure of humility, couching queries/proposed solutions/etc with the language "based on what we know/what is publicly available/etc." then "here is a possible solution". It seems rather than that, some will attribute anything that falls outside of their expectations to either incompetence or malfeasance on the part of CB... which seems counterproductive.
     
    Postmortem and Ogid like this.
  3. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    744
    I agree with most of your points here. And this is also why I try to be as constructive and patient as possible, things take time and there are a lot of corporative decision and schedule that we don't see. However to be fair I've seen improvement with the attention to the rules in this last year, there is still a lot of work to do, but they seem to care and are trying, that's enough for me.
    However I won't say to the users "We won't do this" without justifing it very well tho.
     
  4. toadchild

    toadchild EI Aspect
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,362
    Likes Received:
    4,480
    I know that people don't like to hear this, but if you want to communicate with other humans, how you say things is often as important, or possibly more important, than what you're actually saying.

    If you want to make your point effectively, you're best off both saying it well and having it be a sound argument.
     
  5. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    744
    True, but the channel matter a lot, it's not the same an speech than a forum.
    Here it's much better explain things detailed and be careful with how you say things because it's easier to missunderstand intentions. Making a shitshow could work to win a debate, but it won't help you to win anything in a forum.
    Being said that, if in the middle of a shitshow there is a good idea, then pick the gem and leave the shit.
     
  6. A Mão Esquerda

    A Mão Esquerda Deputy Hexahedron Officer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,599
    Well, what’s “justifying it very well”? My definition and yours and CB’s likely will differ, so some of us will be disappointed. And sometimes business needs will indicate less or more information/justification... however, at this point it seems to be simply quibbling around the edges. CB will explain their decisions as they best see fit, we can agree or not, and if we disagree attempt to reason out that disagreement with courtesy, respect and good faith if we wish to be taken seriously.
     
    Postmortem likes this.
  7. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    744
    My point is CB doesn't want to piss off fans; negatives like those will make some angry and most people won't care about that (while a "positive" like a new faction or a few new units will have mostly positive reactions). If they give a notice about "We won't do this", there should be a very good reason and a good explanation to "placate" those who don't agree.
     
  8. tox

    tox SorriBarai
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    1,554
    A good business PR would never, i repeat NEVER, engage in such shitstorm. Even to "placate those who don't agree".
    This is what you (not you Ogid, much comprehensive) don't understand.

    This kind of behavior has only one end. It alienates people.
    It alienates experienced player, who are annoyed by tones, insinuations and passive-aggressive modes to the point of not giving a fuck about discussions anymore.
    It alienates new players, who open the forum and finds only shitstorm topic back to back giving the false impression that the game doesn't even work.
    It alienates the staff, whom some of your assertions could even be useful, but come on, if you keep insulting and/or attacking them and anybody who try to explain anything (or simply ignoring what is said, or again including ALL of the open question in EVERY open question) you are not doing any good to the game or to your cause.
     
  9. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    3,897
    Having incorrect/incompetent people handling the FAQ also alienates people (see: NWI/Dogged/Shock ruling and others). It's extremely frustrating to have to explain to every new player how Stealth works, because the written rules don't take into account the fact that troopers enter an enemy's LoF when they enter base contact, for example. And if you get the feeling that CB doesn't care enough, and is content with you explaining all the contradictions and errors in their rules to new players rather than them hiring a professional editor... it can be pretty demoralizing.
     
  10. toadchild

    toadchild EI Aspect
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,362
    Likes Received:
    4,480
    It is perfectly possible to point out, discuss, and catalogue such errors or oversights without demeaning anyone or picking fights. Nobody is asking you to stop looking for places that need more clarification or finding instances of inconsistent wording. But the way you present them is often so aggressive that it's hard to engage with in a constructive manner.
     
  11. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    3,897
    Nah, because there's people for whom the things I pointed out aren't problems at all, and it's offensive that I see them as so.
     
  12. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    744
    Pretty much this. Pointing out problems with rules is very helpful, nobody want you to stop doing that; you just need to be a bit more delicate with how you present your points.
    For example, there are so many other ways to say this...

    That's an oportunity to explain better your points, not to go harder on the other users; if you see something wrong clearly and they don't, then just politely explain or change the angle of the discussion to approach the problem from another direction. If you are wrong, someone will debunk your argument, if nobody can then the weight of the facts will speak for itself without manners working against you.
     
  13. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    3,897
    Or, if the criticisms are phrased in a "polite" way, they're capable of being ignored.

    I remember back in one of the BoW campaigns, someone who was caught cheating and fabricating battle reports to game the system was treated better than someone else who critiqued BoW's campaign system. As in, the latter was ejected, the former was not. I hope that's an attitude of the people at BoW rather than CB, but it gets at what I'm talking about - for some people, authority is a more sacred cow than, for example, the sportsmanship of not cheating.
     
  14. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    744
    I think the focus of the critics are also important. If I, very politely, insult every one and their dog, I'm not going to get away with it. But if the focus is the problematic rules and how to solve them, then it'd be ok.
    There are a big difference between "the guy who wrote this rule has the head full of shit" and "There is an inconsistency in these 2 rules, I think the best way to solve them are X and Y"

    I don't know these cases, but I'd had kicked out the first guy if he was forging battle reports like that... the second one, depends a lot on what he said and how.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  15. Mcgreag

    Mcgreag Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2018
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    50
    For many game companies these days FAQ=Errata, for them there is no functional difference.
    For example the X-Wing 1.0 FAQ was 90% errata on card text, mostly for balancing reasons.
     
  16. A Mão Esquerda

    A Mão Esquerda Deputy Hexahedron Officer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,599
    Not an unwise path, but as a thought from the opposite side, what if those who disagree have shown a consistent tendency to refuse to be placated or mollified? Again, as much information as is feasible for CB to communicate should be communicated, with the realization on the part of forum users that it will likely never be what “we” want.
     
  17. A Mão Esquerda

    A Mão Esquerda Deputy Hexahedron Officer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,599
    And from what I remember of the cases, there was a lot of back and forth, he said/she said, etc., with lots of folks making sweeping generalizations and accusations that weren’t necessarily proven. Now it simply serves as an ax to grind, with people using their “memory” of the event to bash.
     
  18. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    744
    It's a tough position, giving few info is bad, giving too much is also bad XDD.
    However I think those who disagree just want a better rules, but the change is too slow for them or they are a bit burned out.
    In this forums I've seen some issues with the way some users express their concerns about rules, and also some threads scalating quickly when other users "retaliate". But I've not seen someone trying to be trully destructive for the sake of just trolling.
    There are some comunication issues here, but nothing unmanageable; with a little good will we can find the middle point.
     
    A Mão Esquerda and DukeofEarl like this.
  19. C0MR4DE

    C0MR4DE Malfunctioning Unidron

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    75
    Please copy me the rule where it says EVO is usable in dep. phase.
     
    #199 C0MR4DE, Jul 18, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019
  20. Andre82

    Andre82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    508
    Funny. I assumed this was in fact required. Hell if a bounty hunter rolled up a bike and did not have a proper base with lof marked, I don't think unit death would be an unreasonable ruling for a TO.
     
    Hecaton likes this.