New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements
-
@ftxcommando said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
@morax said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
I wish ftx would be open to a voice discussion, at least for the sake of resolving issues, but you saw his response.
So we're running with the characterization that FtX is scared of arguing then? Lol, alright.
This thread is evidence enough that people here cannot be trusted to maintain an unstructured discussion, me included since I get lost in every weed trying to refute statements that aren't even relevant.
No, I think you just think it’s a waste time and I’m disappointed the person who proclaims to be “approachable” refuses to actually talk when it likely matters most.
-
This election reminds me of one that just happened where people didn't like mean tweets so they wanted a different person.
Just because you think ftx is mean has no bearing on what others think of him. I do not instantly take things as a directed personal attack so I often do not find malace in ftx's posts, maybe others should grow a little.
-
@veteranashe Many people grow over it and learn to know him, I did.
I and some others fear however, that there are also people who just leave or stop participating. -
So what about splittting the role like this:
- Competitive Councillor (Tournaments + Money, Map-Pools and Settings for Competitive TMM, High Level Casts)
- Player Councillor (Communication focused and general health of the FAF community, including but not limited to New Player experience, collecting Feedback from a wider audience than just top players, finding Trainers, maybe Casual TMM, and in general being a nice guy that encourages participation and has a feeling for pain points.
Hes the kind of guy that would carefully read the "why i would have left FAF thread" for example. Doesnt really need to much other than being around and being helpful, and is expected to know whats going on in all the other parts of FAF, be it councillors or devs).
-
Why does anything have to change? All that change will do is mess up what we have going now and their is no real downside to what we have going now.
-
So here's my problem with this split idea:
First, training is part of "competitive FAF" and I don't understand why the management of said team would fall under the dude that seems to be getting elected to run polls and be a nice guy. The person responsible for trainer management should be a player that has a coherent vision on how to improve players as well as an understanding of reducing the massive quantity of noise in the game to drive home the point of focusing on the fundamentals for new players.
Second, splitting management of anything like matchmaker seems like a complete recipe for disaster as people with entirely different visions of what the end product are keep smashing into each other in PMs and then carrying out said argument into developer circles to get their idea implemented over the other guy's. You elect me as "competitive councillor" and penguin as "player councillor" and I say this whole notion of a matchmaker queue with 4 billion options is a terrible idea for user experience and should never get integrated. How do we settle that?
So what does this leave us with? It leaves us with a "competitive councillor" that has control over any real levers of change in the current PC sphere and a new PC that is entirely neutered and relies on hopefully getting people to do things because a poll they made said X or Y. It doesn't help that part of the reason that the PC position gives the illusion of only caring about top players is because these are the people that care enough to actually help implement some sort of change or policy. Covering FAF events, talking about the best implementation of something for the game, helping reach out to improve lower rated players, hosting tournaments, or doing frankly anything related to community volunteering is highly correlated with people that have invested the time into getting a decent skill. So in the end the PC position is always going to converge into the toxic elitist echochamber narrative because that's just the reality of who wants to give back to the community broadly speaking. Even FAF developers themselves are bare minimum 1000 or 1200 rated and they probably have the lowest mean rating of all FAF contributive teams.
Now, does that mean polling to gather input is bad? No. But it also doesn't mean it's the solution to every problem. Nor does it mean you need a Council position entirely devoted to it, particularly when there is no real authority to give out to the role that makes any sense.
-
@ftxcommando You make some valid points, but you did not address:
- New player joining experience: first weeks
- New player retention: first months
<-- This is where I am deeply worried about your performance.
With Starcraft 2 out of active development, this might be the highest level RTS that is currently actively maintained. We have a responsibility to do this well.
Please just throw some ideas out, I feel many people value your contributions - but are afraid you do more damage than good. Would a split position really not work? Would you have another idea?
-
I have an absolutely inconsequential impact on player retention and anyone thinking otherwise is absolutely delusional. Player retention is resolved through major structural adjustments, things like removing steamlink or creating a matchmaker queue that impacts global rating to stop new players getting kicked from their first game or making navigating the client more intuitive. No one 2 months into FAF gives an iota of a shit about anything being written here. We have done user group tests on new players to see where new players face issues on the client. Absolutely nothing talked about so far in this thread has even touched one of those issues.
If "many people" think I do more damage than good then they are first, off their gourd, and second, better replace me with someone that isn't a "net negative" for FAF.
A split position would not work. My idea is what currently exists. If people want to assist me in FAF communication then by all means they can volunteer. I see zero issues with the current situation that would require adjusting the role.
-
I said nothing about who should be Player Councillour in my post. you are creating a horror-scenario out of it. The most important point seems to not have come through:
- With the split, the primary purpose of the Player Councillor is not to ACT or DECIDE, but to LISTEN, COMMUNICATE and basically have good social skills. Most general conflicts are caused by misunderstandings. The player councillor would recognize this and therefore be able to facilitate constructive discussions and if necessary de-escalation.
You are the kind of guy that NEEDS to be judgemental to do your job. Because if you don't judge, you cannot act. The player councillor could look at FAF from a completely different viewpoint andi think that could be very valuable.
As it stands, we don't need to do this exact split, but we need SOME split. The current amount of responsibilities that are piled on this position is absolutly ridicoulous. The list of stuff you do is laughably out of any reasonable bounds. We are talking about work that is supposed to be done by volunteers in their free time here. This is not a critique of you, its a critique of the position, you are doing a great job DESPITE the job description.
-
katharsas said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
to LISTEN, COMMUNICATE
We already have a councilor role for this?
-
@spikeynoob said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
Why does anything have to change? All that change will do is mess up what we have going now and their is no real downside to what we have going now.
Why do you think it will be messed up, specifically? I’m really unsure how to comment on this as it’s vague.
For instance, why would a new PC mess up the legend of stars tournament from happening?
Why would a new PC mess up the ladder and tmm pools?
-
This post is deleted! -
I agree that the role of Player Councilor has gotten too extensive, and that is part of the problem. FTX does do some things well, but he seems blind to a lot of the negative impacts he has on a lot of people, and he doesn't seem to realize the benefits that could be created by properly splitting the Player Councilor position...
However, the split would need to be well-designed with clear distinctions. Personally, I see a lot of merit in the idea of splitting off position(s) for 'Matchmaker Leader' or 'Tournaments Leader,' with all the relevant powers and responsibilities included. Then people could elect candidates who they think would do the best job for each of those specific positions. However, it seems that FTX is far too power hungry to ever want to split the position in a way that involves him giving up any significant amount of power. -
@morax i feel like all the advantages of ftx will disappear then we will wait for whoever replaces him to learn the position and release their own stuff. For example faf live or the discord upgrades. I have nothing against u, i just like how ftx is doing things rn.
-
Brutus has more responsibilities to manage than I, but Brutus has a team of several developers putting tons of their own hours to maintain various areas of the client and so he can freely delegate several responsibilities to said individuals. He is still ultimately the final voice on large scale development decisions.
Likewise, instead of magically hoping that splitting the role will lead to more activity, you could, you know, actually help out now. Since that doesn't happen and instead I need to deal with random dudes promising to do N+1 of what I do, I need to actively maintain more things than other councillors do. I'd like to throw the power grasping accusation right back at you. It just seems like you want to split the role because you have zero credibility or experience in any PC duties and are hoping to split the position up so it wouldn't count against you.
People seem to forget PC is what it currently is because I built the position, quite literally, from the ground up. When I got the spot in 2018 the total of tools I had available to me were a google calendar that only like 2 TDs actually used. Couldn't
change ladder on my own. Had no actual funds available to me. Nothing related to a system for matchmaker. Zero information about TrueSkill beyond what I could figure out myself. Zero insight into tournaments. No way to contact trainers, gauge them, or work with them. Nothing about who to contact for what or what was currently going on in the client. The reason this position has the breadth it currently has is because I made it have it. I made it have it because I can do the work, the work benefits FAF, and the best path forward is for it to be under my active management.You can't handle what I currently do? Great. Find somebody to delegate the respective responsibilities to or find the time in your own schedule to do all of it or explain that you will be downscaling what I currently do. Doesn't require a new council seat, same as we don't need a java server councillor, java client councillor, and python server councillor.
-
@spikeynoob said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
@morax i feel like all the advantages of ftx will disappear then we will wait for whoever replaces him to learn the position and release their own stuff. For example faf live or the discord upgrades. I have nothing against u, i just like how ftx is doing things rn.
Hmmm... I guess I did a bad job explaining myself in my application, then.
The discord channel is something that I can do and would maintain mostly the same as well. I built a M&M council channel from the ground up and can easily apply that knowledge to the FAF main discord. This is not something you would see disappear, but only improve.
As for the TMM/ladder pools, I will remind you I have 6-7 years experience making maps like Adaptive Crateria, Adaptive Maridia, Frithen, etc. I can debug, fix, and evaluate maps 100x faster than FTX and would not require outsourcing of help with this area, which leads to me favoring other areas of my main concern: the complexity and loss of Tournament Directors.
I cannot speak for everyone, but I helped out TD'ing the LoTS tourney last year and it was miserable. FTX has developed such a complicated system that I believe it is why no one wants to do it anymore. This is a HUGE problem for the competitive scene and has forced him to do things like use a annual participation in events and ladder league to build points for qualification in LoTS.
Just a couple days ago I listened to @Tagada express concern about how he can't get games in ladder, so people ahead of him in current could simply refuse to play and stay ahead.
There are more examples I could use to discuss with you and I hope you realize that FTX system has flaws. I want to keep things more simple so the jobs are more attractive to individuals to help out again. There is no need to have such things as map pool denial, faction vetoes, etc. You can argue the "mirror faction" issue is a top issue and complaint, but is it really worth it at the cost of losing so many TDs? We are down to Swkoll, Dragun, and FTX himself as official TDs. There were at least 8 or more if I recall correctly in the past.
I am not sure how to convince you why I would not need "to learn the system" as you describe. My experience with FAF starting in 2013 has taught me how to run and manage these things plenty.
-
@ftxcommando said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
Likewise, instead of magically hoping that splitting the role will lead to more activity, you could, you know, actually help out now
FTX, when I try to help out with things within the PC 'domain', you usually shut me down or dismiss my ideas. I have tried. You even shut down my suggestions where I was willing to do the work for them, such as with weekly or monthly polls that could get a section in the news or an unofficial tournaments section on the forums (as a more casual alternative to your frustrating system... I know of potential tournaments that didn't happen because of FTX). It doesn't have to be technically within your power for you to use your influence as PC to shut down people's ideas, unfortunately... Perhaps we should talk about the times you've abused your power and censored me for voicing concerns about you abusing your power and making FAF more undemocratic...
So, I usually help out with other things that are more safely outside of your 'domain' as PC because you are so often caustic, dismissive, and controlling in the face of new or different ideas.
I believe the PC position should be split to have a separate 'Tournaments Leader' position and or a separate 'Matchmaker Leader' position in addition to the main PC position because I believe that doing that would be in the best interests of FAF, regardless of whether you, Morax, or I become the next PC. There is a lot of quality and utility in the concept of the division of labor into specialized roles... that's a massive part of how civilization progressed, and it would allow more specialized focuses for FAF within what is currently the PC 'domain'.
In regards to council seats, I am not saying that these new positions would necessarily need to get council seats. Frankly, my goal is to improve FAF and make it better for the overall community.
pfp credit to gieb
-
@morax fair enough. So you think that if you get voted in you will be able to pick up everything ftx is doing without much of a learning curve? It definitely makes me more open to you or others getting the position.
-
@morax said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
I can debug, fix, and evaluate maps 100x faster than FTX and would not require outsourcing of help with this area,
Would that be why when you were on the Matchmaker Team and I gave you a list of maps that simply needed slots adjusted for tmm you never did it and I instead had to go and get svenni to do it.
FTX has developed such a complicated system that I believe it is why no one wants to do it anymore. This is a HUGE problem for the competitive scene and has forced him to do things like use a annual participation in events and ladder league to build points for qualification in LoTS.
The notion that LotS having things like faction and map veto is a causal force on why other tournaments aren't hosted is so beyond reason I literally don't even understand how I'm supposed to address it. You do know that tournaments aren't required by law to follow LotS format, right? How in the world would it stop anybody from hosting their own event?
I made ladder league and other events because I consider activity at the high levels to be just as imperative to the survival of the competitive community as an ever increasing skill level. I intend to reflect that through events that reward activity and give players with a foot in the door of the FAF pantheon of God Players a chance to improve by playing one another in something that later gives them a chance to expose themselves to said God Players in the larger tournament events.
Just a couple days ago I listened to @Tagada express concern about how he can't get games in ladder, so people ahead of him in current could simply refuse to play and stay ahead.
Yeah and now Tagada is like 3-4 games away from basically having a guaranteed spot in the tournament since Thomas has no interest in playing, what's your point?
Tagada is practically guaranteed a slot in LotS in the first place as he will perform superbly in Swkoll's tournaments as well as the mini-LotS events I'll end up hosting prior to December.
There are more examples I could use to discuss with you and I hope you realize that FTX system has flaws. I want to keep things more simple so the jobs are more attractive to individuals to help out again. There is no need to have such things as map pool denial, faction vetoes, etc. You can argue the "mirror faction" issue is a top issue and complaint, but is it really worth it at the cost of losing so many TDs?
I'll wait for you to explain this Olympic level leap in logic.
I am not sure how to convince you why I would not need "to learn the system" as you describe. My experience with FAF starting in 2013 has taught me how to run and manage these things plenty.
Yeah if only we had people that went into your tournament management history already.
-
@emperor_penguin said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:
FTX, when I try to help out with things within the PC 'domain', you usually shut me down or dismiss my ideas.
The only time this has ever happened was when you wanted to join the Matchmaker Team. I gave you a list of maps and told you to put them in order from best to worst in your opinion. I then asked you to justify your placements. No one that was on the team at the time agreed with your assessment of the maps I gave you, both in terms of placement and your rationale for placing them as you did.
In fact, I literally worked with you on map designs to improve them and try out new ideas. I told you to make a map which utilizes the map expansion script and collaborated with you on the design, but unfortunately it was considered too much of a gimmick by the rest of the team so I never put it into ladder.
I have tried. You even shut down my suggestions where I was willing to do the work for them, such as with weekly or monthly polls
People can make polls as they like, there's even a Discord role to ping for surveys that I made. It doesn't mean the polls will result in any policy change unless it's considered pertinent to the policy by the contributor team managing said policy. Just as Deribus made a poll on how people feel about naval balance and it was given an announcement ping, you can do similar things. But it doesn't mean that the balance team is going to go and adjust the game because of what a poll says.
an unofficial tournaments section on the forums (as a more casual alternative to your frustrating system... I know of potential tournaments that didn't happen because of FTX).
The "frustrating system" is giving me a synopsis of a tournament prior to a post so that I can give suggestions to the format to better fit the intended objective. This accomplishes several things, for example:
- It stops incredibly long tournaments which new TDs are predisposed to creating
- It makes people aware of the negatives of a format that they must be prepared to face, like tiebreakers for a round robin or the built in delay for a Double Elimination format.
- It prevents tension of tournaments claiming the same time as other events.
There has literally never been a tournament that I said "you cannot post" but just about every tournament has received some level of input to refine the format from me. Some more than others. I have done "you need to reschedule the time" requests, though. I guess that's the tyranny part.
Perhaps we should talk about the times you've abused your power and censored me for voicing concerns about you abusing your power and making FAF more undemocratic...
Do it.
So, I usually help out with other things that are more safely outside of your 'domain' as PC because you are so often caustic, dismissive, and controlling in the face of new or different ideas.
You have never made a tournament. You are not a trainer. You were rejected for reviewing maps by a team of what would be your peers and assuming you get elected and don't remove the whole team, would still BE your peers. You are also hardly active on any public FAF medium (forums/discord/aeolus).
