Catalyst Gaming

Backup Sections => Half Life Two Roleplay => Suggestions => Topic started by: Officialjake on April 30, 2014, 07:40:23 PM

Title: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Officialjake on April 30, 2014, 07:40:23 PM
I think it would be in the best interest of the server to make any LOA requests for any faction character  with the reason of: "The server isn't populated, tell me when it is." not valid.

If you have a character in a faction that you had to apply for it means that you know how to RP and are a representative of the community on the server.  You should be active on your characters so that it encourages even more people to be active on the server.  Right now if everyone with a faction character was active the server would be booming compared to the average population right now which actually cares about the server (Many Pototes, NRK, Khub, Statua, Nicknero, Dr. Pepper, Delta, Comrade Sterkinov, Tetioko Ippan, Greenman, Krissrules, cow, tyrex, and myself to name a few, I have seen these people on almost everyday trying to populate the sever even if it is empty).

Saying that the server is empty so I won't go on is destroying the server.  If you go online others will too.  At one point this week I myself and 2 other people were online within an hour the server population went from 3 people to almost 9 and stayed that way for a while.


2.  I propose we make inactivity rules for faction characters.  The individual factions should set their own rules but the server should have a minimum that everyone must abide by or risk loosing their character (Unless a VALID LOA is made.)  

Right now the CWU is basically dead.  No one in the CWU has logged into their character at all this week.  The leader hasn't logged in 10 days.  The "veteran cook" has been gone 20+ days and half of the workers are 20+ days inactive.  The only active people in the CWU are trainees which cannot move up because no one that is in charge is online.   

In the MPF conditions are just as bad. 

In ECHO the "TrO" has not been online ONCE since the application cycle opened up.  In fact the only people in ECHO that have actually trained any of the new recruits were Khub and Krisrules.  There are also 4 inactive recruits in ECHO (3 are 20+ days 1 10 days inactive).

In GRID only one SCN unit is active out of 4, however there is not a big issue with actual unit inactivity =)

In RAZOR.... I don't even know where to begin.... Lets start with the HC.  None of the OfC's have logged on ONCE this week.  One of the OfC's isn't even in Catalyst Gaming anymore?  The only semi-active OfC OUT OF THREE! is KillmePlz.  The DvL .apex drops in every 4 days or so for an hour then leaves. 

The only active unit in RAZOR I have seen is NRK which is an 02. 

The sad part about RAZOR is that I have been told by more than a handfull of people NOT to go into RAZOR because it will be impossible to get IC training because the HC will NOT train.  I have actually witnessed it first and has well.  I have been told in character NOT to go into RAZOR because the HC is aweful.

In NOVA, like GRID there is not much of an issue there are only 3 units that are inactive only one of those being 01.  The HC in NOVA is active like in GRID which is great =)

There needs to be rules in place for people in HC positions according to inactivity.  Also the HC need to train the people under them.  It is basically an open secret that nobody likes the HC in RAZOR.

------------------------------Plan of action

I think that once anyone in a HC position in any faction goes inactive they get removed and replaced with someone that is active.  This will keep people happy and make the server more enjoyable.  People in HC positions that get removed would be demoted to the rank of 01.  After this every 5 days or so they would be demoted by one rank once they reach 04 which would take 15 days they would be demoted back to RCT and placed in ECHO.  If for 5 more days they are still inactive they will be "deserviced".

For non HC units they would be demoted a rank every 5 days until RCT then after 5 more days deserviced.

UNLESS- that person files a valid LOA.

For non MPF factions a similar inactivity rule should apply.  If the leadership for a faction (ex. CWU) goes inactive it will be replaced so that the faction can continue to grow and train it's members.  Inactive members will be demoted and removed.

-------------

I think factions should be able to set their own inactivity standards but the server must set a global standard for inactivity that everyone must abide by.

This will keep factions active, the server populated, and people who care about the server happy.

For people against this if you are going to be inactive file a LOA.

"Tell me when the server has 20 people and I will play" should not be a valid reason and only leads to the collapse of factions and eventually the server as everyone picks up this mentality.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Constable Strelnikov on April 30, 2014, 07:43:02 PM
Regarding the inactive NOVA 01, his internet at his college was down and only just got fixed recently.

Ignore me. Yeah, the 01 you're talking about went inactive for IRL reasons. The 01 I was thinking of is the current OfC.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: [CA] KiwieeEh on April 30, 2014, 08:09:41 PM
quick side note poppet. Out of the SCN units 2 are Dev SCN units, one is Rofls and never gets used.

the only active and real SCN unit right now is Nickums'
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Many Potatoes on April 30, 2014, 08:14:16 PM
Did GamingZealot quit CG or just on LOA? If he did quit why hasn't his unit been removed?
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Officialjake on April 30, 2014, 09:05:44 PM
Did GamingZealot quit CG or just on LOA? If he did quit why hasn't his unit been removed?

I heard from many people that he isn't active with CG anymore at all.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: kmp on May 01, 2014, 01:50:22 AM
Quote
In RAZOR.... I don't even know where to begin.... Lets start with the HC.  None of the OfC's have logged on ONCE this week.  One of the OfC's isn't even in Catalyst Gaming anymore?  The only semi-active OfC OUT OF THREE! is KillmePlz.  The DvL .apex drops in every 4 days or so for an hour then leaves. 

1. I am the only OfC in RAZOR, the other two do not play at CG.
2. I live in Australia. Do you know how active the server is when I'm able to join? Because it's real hard to play HL2RP when only about 3 people are awake when I have the time to join HL2RP.

Quote
The only active unit in RAZOR I have seen is NRK which is an 02. 

I'm going to assume you're American then, seeing as NRK is also American. See a similiar thing? .apex is from the UK, I'm in Australia, it would be rare to see us on weekdays, wouldn't it?

Quote
The sad part about RAZOR is that I have been told by more than a handfull of people NOT to go into RAZOR because it will be impossible to get IC training because the HC will NOT train.  I have actually witnessed it first and has well.  I have been told in character NOT to go into RAZOR because the HC is aweful.

I have been asked to train someone once. They asked me at four in the morning before I was going to go to sleep. I'm now at school again, where staying awake till four in the morning is pretty hard to do consistently.

I really don't even know why I bother, seeing as people are saying no-one should join RAZOR. Really helps out the division, because RAZOR has always dealt with extremely in-active Units in the past, getting no-more Units should be fine for us.

Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: aeiou on May 01, 2014, 09:22:00 AM
Considering I quit RAZOR a while back, just haven't removed my unit, your arguments for RAZOR HC are pretty much null, save the one about .apex. I'm pretty sure KMP is well above the average activity level, just that he doesn't always have the ability to be active when you want him to be.

I wasn't active because literally the only good unit we had, NRK, was in a different timezone than me and I kept fucking up trying to make it to the trainings I attempted to schedule. People don't want to join RAZOR because they have a pretty boring job, which KMP is trying to fix. HC should not be demoted every five days because they're inactive - in that case, any unit should.

Stop treating HC any different when it comes to activity, I did it too, and I regret it. They're just like anyone else and can go inactive at times due to boredom or other reasons.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Officialjake on May 01, 2014, 10:03:32 AM
HC should not be demoted every five days because they're inactive - in that case, any unit should.

Stop treating HC any different when it comes to activity, I did it too, and I regret it. They're just like anyone else and can go inactive at times due to boredom or other reasons.

Actually I did state that every unit HC or not should be demoted for every 5 days inactivity.  Which is very reasonable.  It is once a week almost.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: aeiou on May 01, 2014, 10:31:42 AM
It's not very reasonable. If they are inactive, they should have more of a timeout period than that. Instead, just shove them into some inactivity state where they have to inform people why they were inactive later on.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Greenman on May 01, 2014, 10:38:53 AM
Ye 5 days is too short. We need more Officers perhaps though who can conduct training when they're not around.

As for the general population thing, we had 10 people on again last night. I think the server will grow if we keep it up.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: NRK on May 01, 2014, 03:27:31 PM
I'm pretty sure KMP is well above the average activity level, just that he doesn't always have the ability to be active when you want him to be.

This is so wrong. How did you come up with this when you haven't been on the server since he's became OfC?

KMP's only been on once since the map change. I asked him for training and he came at me with some attitude. He then alt-tabbed in and out in of GMod in the HC offices for 30 minutes before finally leaving. This, making Tyrex/222 leave RAZOR, and plot against other HC is all he's done in the time he's been an OfC.

Apex is a better DvL then KMP is an OfC.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Adam S on May 01, 2014, 05:59:48 PM
Every time i read a post from you jake i cringe because of your ignorance for loyalist factions.

Did it ever ring a bell WHY we are all inactive?  It's not because we are too lazy to join when there are only little numbers.  It's just when we get on, slave for a hour on a good building/shop/event; no one shows up.  Everyone runs to D2 as it is apparently the "Best" RP ever.  I have been on off/on making shops only to spend 1 hour afk'ing cause no one will even look at it.  They will just run off to D2.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: kmp on May 01, 2014, 06:12:46 PM
I'm pretty sure KMP is well above the average activity level, just that he doesn't always have the ability to be active when you want him to be.

This is so wrong. How did you come up with this when you haven't been on the server since he's became OfC?

KMP's only been on once since the map change. I asked him for training and he came at me with some attitude. He then alt-tabbed in and out in of GMod in the HC offices for 30 minutes before finally leaving. This, making Tyrex/222 leave RAZOR, and plot against other HC is all he's done in the time he's been an OfC.

Apex is a better DvL then KMP is an OfC.

I've only been on when I could actually play with people, which is far and few between these days. You asked me for training by going around demanding that we do something with breaching involving other division's Units. You do know I can't force them to do that? How would I teach Breaching successfully when I can only ever see 1 damn RAZOR Unit at any given time. I never attempted to make Tyrex leave, nor intended to. I had an arguement with his character IC and I didn't even know he left the division until I saw he was in NOVA on the roster, I was never told he left and I have never been told a reason as to why. If you honestly try and blame something like that on me then you are really trying hard to cause shit. As for 'plotting', do you really think I would act on those threats? Fuck no. I'm not an idiot and I've been playing the HC game longer then you have, I wouldn't waste my time on trying to do any of that shit seriously. They are idle threats that I just spoke with in confidence with your character, in character. I would never want to act on them. The shit storm it would cause wouldn't be wanted.

It seems that wanting to do something for a division directly correlates with the fact that if I don't show it IC I appear to be doing nothing.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Adam S on May 01, 2014, 06:39:06 PM
Let's not forget that if we decided to remove all the inactive units we would have almost none.  And you sure cannot get more just by filling the server to lets say... 20 players.  But that is also the fault of Applications being too ridiculous.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: aeiou on May 01, 2014, 08:17:02 PM
I'm pretty sure KMP is well above the average activity level, just that he doesn't always have the ability to be active when you want him to be.

This is so wrong. How did you come up with this when you haven't been on the server since he's became OfC?

Believe it or not, an Officers job is not always to constantly train units so that they can inflate their ego. You seem to be hoarding for promotions harder than anyone else I have seen - seriously, cut that shit. You make yourself seem like an idiot.

When someone from Australia takes their time to actually devote time to this community, be it Oz or KMP - everyone here seems to expect they have to be on when the majority is. That's not how it is - you, nor the community, dictates when members should be on or how they should behave or when they should be on.

Cut the crap - literally your one argument is how 'oh man he hasnt trained me yet!!!!!!' - are you trying to get rid of EVERY single Officer RAZOR will get so you can get the position yourself? Grow up and get a grip on yourself.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Statua on May 02, 2014, 07:50:05 AM
Quit throwing shit at eachother please. Nobody is perfect and never will be. And no single person is to blame here either.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Adam S on May 02, 2014, 05:44:41 PM
Quit throwing shit at eachother please. Nobody is perfect and never will be. And no single person is to blame here either.
I'm not trying to throw shit.  I'm just saying dont make threads about stuff people dont know shit about.  All it does is cause people to blame each other and piss people off we cannot afford to loose.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: BltElite on May 02, 2014, 06:47:59 PM
You all realise we reinstated HL2RP at the worst time Real Life wise right? Everybodies got exams and stuff coming up now (finals in america or whatever it is?) and all RL shit that is 100% more important than CG. Wait until about July and you will all see an increase in the playerbase, like it does every single year at catalyst gaming


/thread
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Sexy Frog on May 02, 2014, 09:57:15 PM
You all realise we reinstated HL2RP at the worst time Real Life wise right? Everybodies got exams and stuff coming up now (finals in america or whatever it is?) and all RL shit that is 100% more important than CG. Wait until about July and you will all see an increase in the playerbase, like it does every single year at catalyst gaming


/thread

Actually, the server was fine at launch. What seemed to do the most damage was the constant crashes and lag. (Which of course, was no ones fault in particular.) On launch and a week or so after we had at least 30ish players a day, maybe less maybe more depending on the day. But I mean, after the constant crashing and lag every 20 minutes, I'd have been surprised if the population didn't diminish.

That aside, I'm honestly not surprised about the inactivity complaint of RAZOR. Not here to point fingers or anything, but .apex has always been like that, even from when I was OfC in APEX and he was my DvL. Gaming Zealot and I were always the ones really doing all the heavy lifting while he got on every blue moon and basically wagged his finger and gave the occasional thumb up or thumb down for things. We were the ones mostly pulling the strings. Now, whatever reason he has for his inactivity is his own and I particularly do not care, but I'm just saying how it is. He was the less ideal choice for the position, as I have always noted him as particularly inactive. Though in all likelihood, he was mostly likely chosen because either nobody else applied for the position, or those that did were much worse choices.

Never the less, pointing fingers isn't going to solve much, mates.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Statua on May 02, 2014, 11:20:10 PM
You all realise we reinstated HL2RP at the worst time Real Life wise right? Everybodies got exams and stuff coming up now (finals in america or whatever it is?) and all RL shit that is 100% more important than CG. Wait until about July and you will all see an increase in the playerbase, like it does every single year at catalyst gaming


/thread
I hate to agree but I agree.  Especially since it started dying away when I started exam week which is early compared to most places in the world. Middle of June is when it picks up I suppose.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: BltElite on May 03, 2014, 03:41:28 AM
You all realise we reinstated HL2RP at the worst time Real Life wise right? Everybodies got exams and stuff coming up now (finals in america or whatever it is?) and all RL shit that is 100% more important than CG. Wait until about July and you will all see an increase in the playerbase, like it does every single year at catalyst gaming


/thread

Actually, the server was fine at launch. What seemed to do the most damage was the constant crashes and lag. (Which of course, was no ones fault in particular.) On launch and a week or so after we had at least 30ish players a day, maybe less maybe more depending on the day. But I mean, after the constant crashing and lag every 20 minutes, I'd have been surprised if the population didn't diminish.
Yes but any new release will incur a large amount of players for a while. Ours was unfortunately shorter due to the attacks and crashes which made the influx of players flocking for the release a shorter timeframe, but my point still stands it being released right before exams.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Adam S on May 03, 2014, 10:49:13 AM
You all realise we reinstated HL2RP at the worst time Real Life wise right? Everybodies got exams and stuff coming up now (finals in america or whatever it is?) and all RL shit that is 100% more important than CG. Wait until about July and you will all see an increase in the playerbase, like it does every single year at catalyst gaming


/thread

Actually, the server was fine at launch. What seemed to do the most damage was the constant crashes and lag. (Which of course, was no ones fault in particular.) On launch and a week or so after we had at least 30ish players a day, maybe less maybe more depending on the day. But I mean, after the constant crashing and lag every 20 minutes, I'd have been surprised if the population didn't diminish.
Yes but any new release will incur a large amount of players for a while. Ours was unfortunately shorter due to the attacks and crashes which made the influx of players flocking for the release a shorter timeframe, but my point still stands it being released right before exams.
This,
Me for example:
It is like a closeout at school now as i am either taking tests/doing major projects for English. Or helping coordinate events for JrROTC and account for them. Exam week for me starts in 1.5 weeks and then i am clear out of school.  So when i have free time i work to support the family or play a game to wind down.  HL2RP honestly for a lot of us right now is a last priority.
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: Teitoku Ippan on May 03, 2014, 11:28:24 AM
summer will bring population back
Title: Re: Suggestion for LOA rules and inactivity restrictions.
Post by: tics on May 04, 2014, 03:01:05 AM
For the record, GamingZealot's inactivity is due to administrative reasons. OzJackal and I were originally going to PK his OfC, but instead we opted to give him a lengthy ban. Upon issuance of said ban, GamingZealot left the community. He is still on the roster, because he never returned to the server and, therefore, never had his character removed.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal