mute battle!

[Beefmeister]

i would like to propose a one time community Awesomia battle event, led by 2 of the fort battle strategists on gm accounts, or a designated leader for both sides.

since the release of the leader yellow and silver dashes that point where to go, i think it would be interesting if we would have a battle where everyone is ranked as traitor (or stripped of chat rights i guess), so everyone would just have to follow the directions pointed out by the leader since nobody can use the chat. why not?

@Goober Pyle , @Dr Roth , @Jordy, @mnnielsen

 

[Poker Alice]

i would like to propose a one time community Awesomia battle event, led by 2 of the fort battle strategists on gm accounts, or a designated leader for both sides.

since the release of the leader yellow and silver dashes that point where to go, i think it would be interesting if we would have a battle where everyone is ranked as traitor (or stripped of chat rights i guess), so everyone would just have to follow the directions pointed out by the leader since nobody can use the chat. why not?

@Goober Pyle , @Dr Roth , @Jordy, @mnnielsen

Sounds good! I think testing one time experiments have value and it would be interesting to see the results of the experiment. The idea is a sound one if the goal is to achieve complete control of how a battle should go. Is it correct to say what prompted this idea is that user chat is conflicting with management from the leader? It can be fun to follow leaders if they inspire and whether you win or loose at the end make you feel good you went.

The downside of stripping users down is that without input or choice would basically create drones out of users which would conflict with the original purpose of bringing all the different folks together in a battle? Those Awesome battles can appear chaotic, like a free for all, but I thought that is what it was suppose to be like? - dunno, I'm not a fort battle expert , just my two cents.

 

[WesternCalin]

I see no point in having awesomia battles dug by the fort strategists where they use only the pointing arrows. If you really want you can do that yourself in any of the normal battles we have to try and work together as a team without having to write commands, not with a random team like it's on awe. Plus on awesomia things are more chaotic and people generally dont listen or aren't paying attention to the battle.

 

[pero131]

like the idea voting @Dr Roth for president against @Jordy as those 2 are more active in colorado battles than the other two, but i ll take whoever is really volunteering for that

 

[Jordy]

I like this idea and have led Awesomia & non-Awesomia battles before. Of course we would have to have 2 members online at the same time which can be difficult at times, however with good planning this should not be an issue. We actually had something similar in mind sometime soon.

One important note, if we do something in 1 or 2 worlds we likely have to do it in all other worlds too. That would make things more complicated to say the least.

 

[Beefmeister]

i mentioned it here with the team members as main characters because maybe for them it would be easier to organize this, as an event, instead of me trying to cooperate with the other alliance for this to happen. i imagined that if if we start traitoring everyone or muting the chat without people knowing what is gonna happen, cuz not everyone is reading telegrams, some would complain and this would turn to chaos. but if it would be promoted as an event there would be less chances of that happening. at least that's my thought process. and yes, it's true, if it would be done on all servers, maybe it's better to designate volunteer leaders

also, @WesternCalin , sure, there's no point in it. it's just a brainfart idea that came to my mind to use the arrows and see if people follow them since in battles right now they don't really have much use

 

[Goober Pyle]

If there are rewards (Henry GM battles) then there is a need to balance reward opportunities between worlds and for the battles to be designed to mitigate any potential appearance of impropriety/accusations of bias that may arise from, say, allowing ranks that determine who gets in and who gets left out.

We have more flexibility with unrewarded (Sheriff GM) battles. Case in point the "technology demonstration" for the offie redirect function. It is permissible to run a mini-event like the one proposed here and we will consider it.

Additionally, before re-polling about using join restrictions we will try to do a technology demonstration and phrase the questions better so people better understand what they are voting for.

 

[Abydos1]

Hey, can you please turn off the sector labels by default after this mute battle?

 

[Beefmeister]

cmon @Jordy the fort battle strategist i thought you said you planning and gonna do something

he needs to be removed from his nugget payroll ngl