Community Rep Thread (September-October)

[Wastee]

Fucksake if you hate 63e Siege make your own server and spend time getting it populated like they did. 63e Siege didn't become the number one server on NA in a night. Pretty sure it's risen and died before now it's just staying up.

Ha. Goodluck getting any pop from the 63e. Not only is it probs favorited by the pubs at this point, but you are never gonna be able to populate a server more than the 63e can due to their sheer size.

63e Siege is a problem. The main argument that people have for it is "It's a 63e server, paid for by the 63e, so 63e rules", which while true, doesn't make it less of a problem for the community.


Also please, do continue discussion here. I'm listening. Don't mind all the nay-sayers, my ears are wide open.

same was said about NA 1 when 27th had their siege just sayingggg. Look at NA 1 now xdedede

[GeneralSquirts]

Fucksake if you hate 63e Siege make your own server and spend time getting it populated like they did. 63e Siege didn't become the number one server on NA in a night. Pretty sure it's risen and died before now it's just staying up.

Ha. Goodluck getting any pop from the 63e. Not only is it probs favorited by the pubs at this point, but you are never gonna be able to populate a server more than the 63e can due to their sheer size.

63e Siege is a problem. The main argument that people have for it is "It's a 63e server, paid for by the 63e, so 63e rules", which while true, doesn't make it less of a problem for the community.


Also please, do continue discussion here. I'm listening. Don't mind all the nay-sayers, my ears are wide open.

Your point has already been debunked. I believe it was Siwi who made a Siege server during our "reign" and banned only 63e and BBG from recruiting. For a while, it actually got a lot more than the 63e ever did because the 63e Siege was dead for 3+ months, but we didn't say anything because at the end of the day Siwi's server was his server and the 63e wasn't focusing on using our time to recruit, so therefore we hurt for our lack of work towards the server. It was a fun server to go to as well, but for some reason Siwi ended up not continuing the server and he shut it down. Yet, during the months the 63e siege was down, you didn't see an increase in other regiments numbers or anything change for that matter. Just nothing happened for the most part. So, that's actual proof that our server literally does nothing to harm the community.

[Siwi]

Fucksake if you hate 63e Siege make your own server and spend time getting it populated like they did. 63e Siege didn't become the number one server on NA in a night. Pretty sure it's risen and died before now it's just staying up.

Ha. Goodluck getting any pop from the 63e. Not only is it probs favorited by the pubs at this point, but you are never gonna be able to populate a server more than the 63e can due to their sheer size.

63e Siege is a problem. The main argument that people have for it is "It's a 63e server, paid for by the 63e, so 63e rules", which while true, doesn't make it less of a problem for the community.


Also please, do continue discussion here. I'm listening. Don't mind all the nay-sayers, my ears are wide open.

Your point has already been debunked. I believe it was Siwi who made a Siege server during our "reign" and banned only 63e and BBG from recruiting. For a while, it actually got a lot more than the 63e ever did because the 63e Siege was dead for 3+ months, but we didn't say anything because at the end of the day Siwi's server was his server and the 63e wasn't focusing on using our time to recruit, so therefore we hurt for our lack of work towards the server. It was a fun server to go to as well, but for some reason Siwi ended up not continuing the server and he shut it down. Yet, during the months the 63e siege was down, you didn't see an increase in other regiments numbers or anything change for that matter. Just nothing happened for the most part. So, that's actual proof that our server literally does nothing to harm the community.

lol the blatant ignorance

I was able to start a regiment and get it to decent size all while allowing everyone to recruit. As for the reason for banning recruiting, it was because of your server policies. We never actually enforced that rule in any case. And I did not shut it down until after you guys kicked your server back off and no one played anymore. I did not just shut it down, I tried very hard to keep it going

[AP0CALYPS3]

Fucksake if you hate 63e Siege make your own server and spend time getting it populated like they did. 63e Siege didn't become the number one server on NA in a night. Pretty sure it's risen and died before now it's just staying up.

Ha. Goodluck getting any pop from the 63e. Not only is it probs favorited by the pubs at this point, but you are never gonna be able to populate a server more than the 63e can due to their sheer size.

63e Siege is a problem. The main argument that people have for it is "It's a 63e server, paid for by the 63e, so 63e rules", which while true, doesn't make it less of a problem for the community.


Also please, do continue discussion here. I'm listening. Don't mind all the nay-sayers, my ears are wide open.

Your point has already been debunked. I believe it was Siwi who made a Siege server during our "reign" and banned only 63e and BBG from recruiting. For a while, it actually got a lot more than the 63e ever did because the 63e Siege was dead for 3+ months, but we didn't say anything because at the end of the day Siwi's server was his server and the 63e wasn't focusing on using our time to recruit, so therefore we hurt for our lack of work towards the server. It was a fun server to go to as well, but for some reason Siwi ended up not continuing the server and he shut it down. Yet, during the months the 63e siege was down, you didn't see an increase in other regiments numbers or anything change for that matter. Just nothing happened for the most part. So, that's actual proof that our server literally does nothing to harm the community.

The argument is far from debunked. The 63e far out sizes any other regiment, and it would take a consistent and prolonged effort from multiple regiments to ever hope to get a server more populated than 63e siege. All it would take to slip up is one night of inactivity and the 63e goes to its Siege after an event and boom, effort wasted

63e siege. Is. A. Problem. Your argument is solely based around the fact that everyone else should solve it by paying for and populating another server that allows recruiting for everyone. Do you not see the issue here?

[GeneralSquirts]

Going away from the previous narrative, is there a way we can perhaps see some more support go towards the Thursday Public LB hosted on NA1 every Thursday, I know a good number of regiments continue to show their support of Pubs participating with their regiment and giving them an opportunity to experience organized regiment play. I know when I go there with my Cavalry, I try to get my guys to be as accepting as possible to the pubs that come to cav with us, cause most of them are just cool down to earth pubs most of the time. So if possible, we can try to get more regiment rallying around the event, also a good chance for the smaller regiments who aren't familiar with the event to get their names out there. Other than the Pub LB, nothing else is done out in the open for the most part, any suggestions on perhaps doing something more open for people that are more on hands in-game and don't spend time on the forums?

Putting this back up in case it gets lost, but also because you're insinuating on trying to change a privately owned servers guidelines. I want to talk about doing things about actually taking a step forward in the community by discussing actual community things as a whole. This has more to do with a privately owned server and the disagreements had with the private owner. Think we need to focus on not making this a thread about a single individual within the community and more about the actual whole of the community.

[AP0CALYPS3]

The point of this thread is identifying problems in the community and solving them.

The problem:

Monopoly of recruitment on major servers leads to a spiraling problem where large regiments get larger and smaller regiments risk disbanding and leaving the community.

Now, if people feel that 63e Siege is part of the problem then they are free to discuss why on this thread. I will listen. If people feel that it's not a problem, they are free to state why and I will listen. I will take a side as needed and we will find a solution. That's how it works.

[GeneralSquirts]

The point of this thread is identifying problems in the community and solving them.

The problem:

Monopoly of recruitment on major servers leads to a spiraling problem where large regiments get larger and smaller regiments risk disbanding and leaving the community.

Now, if people feel that 63e Siege is part of the problem then they are free to discuss why on this thread. I will listen. If people feel that it's not a problem, they are free to state why. I will listen. I will take a side as needed and we will find a solution. That's how it works.

Your solution includes going into a privately owned server and forcing change. In other words, never going to be a real solution because it's privately owned. They can discuss it, but talking about a broken leak opposed to going out and just fixing the leak yourself are very different.

moved this part out cause it isnt relevant to solving the issue.

[AP0CALYPS3]

The point of this thread is identifying problems in the community and solving them.

The problem:

Monopoly of recruitment on major servers leads to a spiraling problem where large regiments get larger and smaller regiments risk disbanding and leaving the community.

Now, if people feel that 63e Siege is part of the problem then they are free to discuss why on this thread. I will listen. If people feel that it's not a problem, they are free to state why. I will listen. I will take a side as needed and we will find a solution. That's how it works.

Your solution includes going into a privately owned server and forcing change. In other words, never going to be a real solution because it's privately owned. They can discuss it, but talking about a broken leak opposed to going out and just fixing the leak yourself are very different.

Also, again, not a monopoly. Monopoly would mean the servers actively take action to stop others from coming into the market via sabotage, bribes, etc. Things that are unethical. Only thing that 63e Siege has done is kept being a server. So again, there is no monopoly, there is only the inability of others.

That's actually not what a monopoly means at all.



See, there are two solutions here:

1) Ask the 63e, by far the largest regiment in the game, to relax the restrictions on recruitment on their server and allowing regiments who need the recruits far more than the 63e does to recruit and grow, allowing more regiments/people to join the community.

2) Raise another privately owned server that wont restrict recruitment to one regiment, whos sole purpose is to compete with 63e NA Siege, all the while contacting several whole regiments to populate it just to compete with the sheer numbers the 63e has at its disposal to populate its own server.

The way I see it, the former option makes much more sense and is the best option for the community.

Lets face it: You CANNOT deny that the 63e's and BBGs monopoly on recruitment are a problem. The only thing you are arguing is that the 63e shouldn't fix the problem. While you are justified in doing so, that does not make it any less of a problem. It NEEDS to be solved, one way or another. If the 63e is not willing to solve it, then do not complain when the community despises and pressures the 63e even more.

[BabyJesus]

So can we talk about how Karth shouldn't be an admin anymore? That seems like fun. +it's actually gotta do with FSE

[GeneralSquirts]

Feel free to do option 2 cause option 1 isn't a well thought out or fair approach.

Option 2 is probably an option that makes sense, but my entire point is no one ever puts the time to do that other than when Siwi had his up. Also, when you say we complain when we get pressured, it's more so I complain about it when people complain that the 63e isn't open to people and I bring up the fact is because the narrative always ends up one of bullying/harassment, hence why we try not to open our community to the outside 1v1/competitive/veteran community.

But yeah, Ap0c your second option sounds like a good option, have people from all around the community actually take their time for a community siege server and then populate it as a community. Don't see a problem with that, sounds great actually.

[BabyJesus]

Feel free to do option 2 cause option 1 isn't a well thought out or fair approach.

Option 2 is probably an option that makes sense, but my entire point is no one ever puts the time to do that other than when Siwi had his up. Also, when you say we complain when we get pressured, it's more so I complain about it when people complain that the 63e isn't open to people and I bring up the fact is because the narrative always ends up one of bullying/harassment, hence why we try not to open our community to the outside 1v1/competitive/veteran community.

But yeah, Ap0c your second option sounds like a good option, have people from all around the community actually take their time for a community siege server and then populate it as a community. Don't see a problem with that, sounds great actually.

HEARD IT HERE FIRST! 63e DECLARES WAR ON NW COMMUNITY!!!!!!!!111112122222

[Wastee]

NW_Siege_NA1

[GeneralSquirts]

NA_Community_Siege

But seriously, all joking aside, I think a Community Siege would be awesome. Get together notable figures in the community, they serve as the head admins for the server. Pick up some moderators to go alongside the head admins that go to the server to make sure the rules are being followed, ask regiments/get regiments to attend at the same time. Could try it, sounds actually very successful as long as it's supported by the community here and actually gets moderated consistently.

[maccle]

Grimsight get in on this!
w-W
W-w
W-W

[Theodin]

How is option 1 not well thought out? The way I interpreted it was that the 63e should share thier recruiting pool with other regiments, so more regiments could grow and populate.
Honestly, if you want to see the community grow and be more healthy, what is so wrong about giving more room for recruitment in the 63e siege server? I'd love to know your problem with relaxing restrictions.