Dr StrangeBB

[SCG48]

My solution:

Keep putting rounds down range until they call their hits, if your sniping, dont give up your postion by firing too many times from the same position. If you know you hit him, and he doesnt call his hits talk to the game host.

Best solution, claymores, 'nades....... with those it will be impossible to "just walk away" without calling your hits, and most of all their loud.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

I thought onf that a while ago, and as long as you're okay with setting yourself up with being accused of running a star chamber, or being elitist, no problem. I don't have an issue with it. I also had some ideas for a sign up system hosts could use to manage attendance at games and rate players, similar to an eBay rating. At a certain level you could ban or temp ban certain people from signing up when they reach a certain threshold, or, bring them to the attention of a group in charge of dealing with players like that (other players who are not the 7 hosts so we don't get accused of nepotism or anything). We would just need a good PHP programmer to make that app, I had it designed a while ago...

The Population of hosts is much smaller .. and easier to organize than the population of players.

The fact is... if we as hosts and organizers put in place standards and best practice guidelines.. and enforce them... the players will have to accept them.. or not play.

There is already operating an informal player ban mechanism.. as I know of a few players who have been pretty much squeezed out of the main community due to behavior issues.

The building blocks are already in place it is just a matter of formalization.

I want to have a Game Host round table discussion about this exact initiative at TAC-08 it would be good to have as many of the hosts there as possible.

[Andres]

Well, I liked the speech.

[arman]

Originally Posted by zone 69

I heard the word cheater at our games aswell. I just tell them not to worry about it so much and at least there here playing.

And we all take hit,s without knowing it sometimes.

When it comes right down to it the goal is to have fun is it not.

thats right as long as you call you hits your having fun cause it real to you not the cheater... i dont even care if their cheating cause that means that i can shot at them more, and like brian said YOU get better not them.

[arman]

Originally Posted by Ridiculous132

I find that when you snipe, you often get people ignore the hits, either because they just don't realize they've been hit (my VSR-10 is not too powerful and I tend to shoot from quite far), or because they're cheaters. But most of the time people just don't realize. I'm not mad at them, but the next shot will be to a more exposed place. Not bare skin, just less kitted spot, like the leg. If I'm really far or the guy is really thick, I go for the goggles, and I've almost never hit people in the face, and even then it doesn't hurt too much because the BB has lost alot of it's velocity once there. Ok Aper might disagree on this one, I got him pretty bad once he he.

I find the goggle shot to be quite satisfying and very effective

this is why everyone should wear a mask that covers all the skin on your face so you dont bitch when you get shot in the head, personally thats where i shoot our rules state that you need a full face mask.

[Gunk]

I got clipped in the chin at Z3... I was running forward as well as leaning forward trying to reach a downed zombie when POW! right in the left side of the chin... I was off balance cause of the leaning and running and I ended up spinning and falling on my back laughing...

I was actually hoping for a decent skin break... or at least a nice war wound to show for it, but I didn't even get a welt or bruise... I felt violated.

Oh well it was fun.

[Zeonprime]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

I thought onf that a while ago, and as long as you're okay with setting yourself up with being accused of running a star chamber, or being elitist, no problem. I don't have an issue with it. I also had some ideas for a sign up system hosts could use to manage attendance at games and rate players, similar to an eBay rating. At a certain level you could ban or temp ban certain people from signing up when they reach a certain threshold, or, bring them to the attention of a group in charge of dealing with players like that (other players who are not the 7 hosts so we don't get accused of nepotism or anything). We would just need a good PHP programmer to make that app, I had it designed a while ago...

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

The Population of hosts is much smaller .. and easier to organize than the population of players.

The fact is... if we as hosts and organizers put in place standards and best practice guidelines.. and enforce them... the players will have to accept them.. or not play.

There is already operating an informal player ban mechanism.. as I know of a few players who have been pretty much squeezed out of the main community due to behavior issues.

The building blocks are already in place it is just a matter of formalization.

I want to have a Game Host round table discussion about this exact initiative at TAC-08 it would be good to have as many of the hosts there as possible.

For players who don't know. Right now how it works is this.
You break a rule at a game, that host then informs when he or she remembers, any other host who thinks they need to know (If the player for example is a GTA player with limited transportation..ie the TTC. Then it's usually just the local hosts in the GTA that get told.).

Brian while a round table of HOSTS is a great idea, not sure TAC08 or even CANOP will be the proper venues for this idea... simply put we'd be too freaking busy with everything else we have to look after at either event to sit down with the others to hash out the system.


A sit down meeting away from distractions, with someone taking notes of the whole meeting.

I think as it stands right now break the host groups up into a Western Ontario (Durham region and west) and an eastern Ontario (East of Durham region) set of groups.

We still have ontarioairsoft.com registered and we know the guy who owns airsoftontario.com getting someone to make that php system scarecrow has intergrated should be possible. We know who the hosts are. basically we can sit in our chairs and talk about it or do something. Honestly this is a helluvalot easier than convincing airsofters to organize. As long as they have fun and safe games who really is going to complain? also if they don't like it..they can host their own games...but most fields will prefer using hosts they know and trust (as Joe from FR pointed out...not everyone gets to host afterhours night games).

Scarecrow any association will look elitist. I've reached the point of..don't like it? tough shit. Any host will know the cost and time put into the running of an event, and if we want to make sure we get maximum value our events, getting the best players attending is in the best interests of everyone else going.

as for "other players who are not the 7 hosts so we don't get accused of nepotism or anything." this sounds like an oversite group...which honestly doesnt sound nessecary... if people dont like what's happening it would be easier for them to simply not go to games and arrange their own. having a suggestion area, a place to put postings on status of issues on hand, etc. would be better. I know I have to bite my tongue on occasion when I get someone telling me how to run something or other and who obviously has no clue on how to implement said suggestion. heck we could get a complaint email address setup that get's CC'd to all the hosts on the council or whatever it would be called... so everyone knows when one has an issue...

oh and maybe something to qualify a person to sit with the group... say a specific minimum number of public games hosted and a vote to bring them on board? just a thought

ok rambling again.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

I want to have a Game Host round table discussion about this exact initiative at TAC-08 it would be good to have as many of the hosts there as possible.

I'd be up for a discussion there, everyone is there, might as well take advantage. I agree Zeon, CANOP will be much more problematic to have that discussion - although I think its something we should not wait for CANOP for. It would actually be nice to have something in place by CANOP, something people could be introduced to.

I am not big on complex governance or anything corporate. The simplier and more automatic we make they system, the better it will serve both hosts and players. I really like the idea of a system that lets me leverage information that say TTAC gets on participants that I can then become aware of when I host my next event. As it stands now its take 3 or 4 events for an asshat to generally come to the attention of all of us. The system I am proposing would identify problems earlier and hopefully let us intervene earlier and rescue what might be a good player who's just not 'getting it'.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

I'd be up for a discussion there, everyone is there, might as well take advantage. I agree Zeon, CANOP will be much more problematic to have that discussion - although I think its something we should not wait for CANOP for. It would actually be nice to have something in place by CANOP, something people could be introduced to.

I am not big on complex governance or anything corporate. The simplier and more automatic we make they system, the better it will serve both hosts and players. I really like the idea of a system that lets me leverage information that say TTAC gets on participants that I can then become aware of when I host my next event. As it stands now its take 3 or 4 events for an asshat to generally come to the attention of all of us. The system I am proposing would identify problems earlier and hopefully let us intervene earlier and rescue what might be a good player who's just not 'getting it'.

I'm not proposing any policy making .. just an informal meeting around a table at TAC-08.. 30 minute discussion regarding where we want to go, what we want to do... how much.. and on what time line.

Anything that gets implemented has to be devoted to facilitating the indoctrination of new players.. and remedial action on problem players..the course of punitive action has to always be a last resort. I think that right now we are quick to write off players earlier than maybe we should.. or could if we had some remedial actions available.

[Krookedatmosphere]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

soft tissue + .28's = pain. Its a solution thats worked well for me.

Other than that, well said Brian. In a one-on-one that is a good philosophy to adopt. If you're a doormat or perhaps a sub.


/RANT START
Unfortunately there are instances where you have two or more teams going at it and you have one group exercising that philosophy and the other doesn't and doesn't call hits, and the game collapses because strategic and tactical objectives are lost to playing zen footsy with a bulletproof asshole. And whats worse than one bulletproof asshole is a team of bulletproof assholes. I've seen many strategies to deal with it, but my favorite is to just let Claymore loose on them. Its very satisfying watching a 250lb Scotsman drop his AK, and walk through a hail of fire and grab some guy by the scruff of the neck in order to gain his attention for some one on one counselling. It usually solves the problem fairly quickly. I believe making examples of cheaters and publically HUMILIATING THEM is a good place to start, rather than to condone their behaviour by passively tolerating it. I've said it many times before and I will say it here. TOLERATION IS A FORM OF CONSENT!

This does not mean I presume that if I shoot in someone's direction I will automatically hit them. But after 5 years of this game, when I have to unload a highcap on someone and they still don't call out, I won't tolerate that and I promise to be loud, rude, obnoxious and will do my best to spoil that person's day, because he's spoiling mine. Conservatively speaking, I think I spend between BBs, batteries, gas, game fee, etc, somewhere near the $100 per game mark (amortize out your equipment costs too) and when some asshole deprives me of my pastime because he decides to turn on GOD MODE, I believe that person is spending MY money on something I did not pay for. He paid to be part of a simulation that we all agreed to, and then he chooses to break that simulation and ruin my enjoyment - I didn't sign up for that. That person has no place at a milsim airsoft event.
/RANT END

My 0.02 cents

+1

[wildcard]

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

I'm not proposing any policy making .. just an informal meeting around a table at TAC-08.. 30 minute discussion regarding where we want to go, what we want to do... how much.. and on what time line.

Anything that gets implemented has to be devoted to facilitating the indoctrination of new players.. and remedial action on problem players..the course of punitive action has to always be a last resort. I think that right now we are quick to write off players earlier than maybe we should.. or could if we had some remedial actions available.

the problem will always exist, no mater how much we control it, my question to ALL the organizers are why can't we curb the cheaters out??
I had a chance to play with an old teamate last year and this is in Hong Kong where they play with ridiculously high fps limit for indoors and outdoors, and rarely is there any arguments about cheating and these guys are mostly kitted out to the tits, i saw a guy playing with a replica level4 vest with foam inserts.

I certainly do not want to play with crazy fps aeg anymore i'm too old for that shit and i have done that trust me it gets very expensive, but i don't see a viable solution other than forcing players to go through some sort of training or certification program to play then maybe the rating system Scarecrow mention will work. by just simply banning players from organize games will only force them to go else where and spawned another group of potentially dangerous and irresponsible players without the benefit of the proper education of the game

"I am not big on complex governance or anything corporate. The simplier and more automatic we make they system, the better it will serve both hosts and players. I really like the idea of a system that lets me leverage information that say TTAC gets on participants that I can then become aware of when I host my next event. As it stands now its take 3 or 4 events for an asshat to generally come to the attention of all of us. The system I am proposing would identify problems earlier and hopefully let us intervene earlier and rescue what might be a good player who's just not 'getting it'."

totally agree on the above comment by Scarecrow but what we should concentrate first is how can we help those players to play the game as it was intended to be played

[wildcard]

Originally Posted by Zeonprime

Scarecrow any association will look elitist. I've reached the point of..don't like it? tough shit. Any host will know the cost and time put into the running of an event, and if we want to make sure we get maximum value our events, getting the best players attending is in the best interests of everyone else going.

as for "other players who are not the 7 hosts so we don't get accused of nepotism or anything." this sounds like an oversite group...which honestly doesnt sound nessecary... if people dont like what's happening it would be easier for them to simply not go to games and arrange their own. having a suggestion area, a place to put postings on status of issues on hand, etc. would be better. I know I have to bite my tongue on occasion when I get someone telling me how to run something or other and who obviously has no clue on how to implement said suggestion. heck we could get a complaint email address setup that get's CC'd to all the hosts on the council or whatever it would be called... so everyone knows when one has an issue...

oh and maybe something to qualify a person to sit with the group... say a specific minimum number of public games hosted and a vote to bring them on board? just a thought

ok rambling again.

maybe the way the game has evolved an oversite commitee or some sort of governance is what we needed

Needs more Darwin.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by MadMorbius

Needs more Darwin.

To some extent yes, but Darwin also creates intense friction at a game, on the boards, etc. To an earlier point, as much as it pains me to admit it, it really is up to those of who have played for a while to take new players and somehow get them indoctrinated BEFORE they hit the field for the first time and make all of those embarassing and deadly mistakes that can result in a bad rep for months or years.

A target rich environment is only available when you have enjoyable targets to play with. An enjoyable target is one that knows the rules and plays by them and stays in the sim. I think things like the Plantation Noob day or other events like CANOP can do a lot to lessen potentially bad incidents and it also gives no excuse to those who choose to behave unacceptably when such events are available to be attended.

Jesus, sounds like OASA all over again. Please god, just shoot me dead right now.

I like the host controlled online rating and invite/signup system.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

One of this issues with "getting organized" in the past has been quarum of players..

if we organize in the middle.. with the hosts... then we don't need to agree to any majority mandate.. We can as a small group make decisions that can be implemented ..

Its already happening.. Zeon has been pushing this direction for a while.. and frankly there is no reason not to get it going ...

It is a heck of a lot easier to get 6 -10 people on the same page than it is to get 200-500

Short term.. we agree to feedback loops for censure of abusers.
We harmonize a very basic ruleset.

Longer term we implement indoctrination procedures for players, The hosts.. as a group essentially are in a position to impose structure..we do already every time we publish rules..

And the population of players already accept the authority