SWLE Forum Index
FAQ  Search  Memberlist  Usergroups  Register  Log in  Album  Download
Search found 4 matches
SWLE Forum Index
Author Message
  Topic: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
rusvill

Replies: 34
Views: 23593

PostForum: Suggestions   Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:16 am   Subject: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
rusvill wrote:
2) In addition to, or separately from 1) Split the comp into two sections with three to five winners in each section. Have the sections locked in for the duration of any month so that the 'Durstan team' can't leave to gain an advantage and then return or even be accused of it.


It seems as though as hard as I try I am unable to successfully communicate my meanings or desires in this conversation.

Since the 'edit' button is no longer available to me I apologise to Durstan who has sent me an email asking for this to be edited.

Durstan, my point was not an attack on you. I don't even know you. In fact I found the little I do know about you (your image in your short notes) to be humourous. My point here was simply to state that teams should be roughly locked in for a monthly period so that there is not able to be any accusations of unfair play. I know nothing about the breakaway that you and ?Kra92? and one other player made other than that you left and came back within about a week and that you are all very good clickers.

I was not intending to accuse you of any wrong doing. I was merely trying to give a recent example people may be interested in or familiar with.

Another example which I guess to be entirely innocent was the merger between the Village Dynasty with all the Asterix logos (I can't remember the team's name) and whoever they merged with. A merger between two teams is fine and should be allowed, but it is unfair if it raises the MinAve. If teams A and B each have five with ave of 1500, five with ave of 1200 and five with ave of 900 (giving each team a top 15 ave of 1200) then a merger doesn't give an ave of 1200, it is ten at 1500 and five at 1200 for a top 15 of 1400.

Admins/Mods, I feel that this post is still on topic (just); however, after this post I will not be contributing to this topic any further. For the sake of abiding by the rules I will only respond to emails if I think it to be constructive. Otherwise I am bowing out of this conversation.
  Topic: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
rusvill

Replies: 34
Views: 23593

PostForum: Suggestions   Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 8:49 am   Subject: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
Yes, Demonic, Admins should not be allowed to play. To use your examples of a running club, a club captain or president. Of course they are allowed to run - THEY don't create or enforce the rules, nor are they in a position of which they are able to gain any unfair advantage by banning runners from other clubs.
  Topic: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
rusvill

Replies: 34
Views: 23593

PostForum: Suggestions   Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 8:21 am   Subject: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
PS, perhaps even Admins should be given one (or more) links placed at the top of the page above even the highest MinAve instead of at the bottom as is currently.

Admins should NEVER be allowed to compete in Dynasties. Moderators, yes. All they do is make sure people don't swear in the forums, etc., etc., but Admins have to power to ban, kick, etc.
  Topic: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
rusvill

Replies: 34
Views: 23593

PostForum: Suggestions   Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 8:15 am   Subject: Monthly contest to reward more dynasties.
First, this all probably doesn't effect me since I'm in the process of leaving Yarolds due to time commitments. I'm also not that fazed on how this all ends up since I am/was one of those n00bs who was really only ever here to get clicks. The only difference is that I rarely went negative.

Second, let's be honest, the only person/entity which really benefits from the competition is Yarold/Stan/Rozz/yarold.eu. Stan has to increase clicks somehow. Yarold has to encourage clicking without discouraging clickers. I'm not discouraged - I'm leaving because of lack of time.

Third, my ideas:
1) Reward the top five (or at minimum, three) teams. For example, 1st = 80,000, 2nd = 40,000, 3rd = 20,000, 4th = 10,000 and 5th = 5,000 or better still 50,000/30,000/20,000/15,000/10,000 in order to encourage competition but still make the differences for the higher places more worthwhile.
2) In addition to, or separately from 1) Split the comp into two sections with three to five winners in each section. Have the sections locked in for the duration of any month so that the 'Durstan team' can't leave to gain an advantage and then return or even be accused of it.
3) Maybe the top 15 clickers isn't enough. Maybe it does need to be the entire team min ave. Even then I can see potential issues with that unless 2) is used. Perhaps the top 50% of a team or something would be better.
4) MOST IMPORTANT of these... The team who won last month should not be eligible for FIRST place this month. Even better, First is only eligible for 3rd at most the month after their win, then 2nd the next month, then back to possible first in the third month. This should encourage teams to still compete in subsequent months but still allow others to keep up or catch up.

Fourth and finally, Admins should NEVER be involved in Dynasties. Yarold does well by having a persistant link but a 0 minave. Reward Admins with a permanent link but remove them from being in Dynasties. This is for accountability. Why do you think that a cheque always has to be countersigned? Why does a Prime Minister have a cabinet?
 
Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB modified by Przemo © 2003 phpBB Group
Akagahara style created by Nash modified v0.8 by warna