[POLL] Rule Changes

[chacusha]

Here are some proposed rule changes for Game 3. First there's a detailed overview of all the changes and then a poll at the bottom.


[ITEM 1] Alliances in Game 3
Under the alliance system, the six teams here at ff_land get divided into pairs (alliances). The point values of allied teams are added together and the alliance with the highest total is declared the winner. Last game it was the Black Mage/Dragoon alliance. Under the alliance system, the individual team comms would all be combined as well, meaning that, for example, all White Mages would be invited to their ally comm as members without posting access and vice versa.

The new alliances for Game 3 have not been decided yet. I'm currently trying to figure out what is the fairest way of pairing up the teams that ideally gets every team a new partner. (That's the next item.)

• Rationale: Creates larger "teams" and allows uneven teams to be balanced.
• Arguments Against: I'm not sure if anyone brought up arguments but I can see it being more motivating to compete if you don't have to worry about the performance of your allied team. It also may interfere with building up individual team identity.


[ITEM 2] Deciding on Alliances
Different people may find different things important or less important but I'm thinking the three main deciding factors would be (1) power balance (having alliances that pair strong teams with weak teams, and middle teams with each other), (2) new partners (giving each team an ally they've not had before), and (3) having a neutral mod on each alliance (zerrat, arivess, and xinnk are a Monk, Thief, and White Mage). Some stats from Game 2 may be helpful in estimating the strength of each team.

Option 2A:
Black Mage + Monk
Dragoon + Thief
Soldier + White Mage
• Positives: A neutral mod in each alliance, each team gets a new partner
• Negatives: Dragoon/Thief team seems significantly underpowered while Black Mage/Monk is maybe overpowered

Option 2B:
Black Mage + Soldier
Dragoon + White Mage
Monk + Thief
• Positives: Possibly the most balanced setup, and new partners for 2 of 3 teams
• Negatives: Monk/Thief already had an alliance; neutral mods are clustered

Option 2C:
Black Mage + Thief
Dragoon + White Mage
Monk + Soldier
• Positives: Moderately balanced, one neutral mod in each alliance, all-new partners
• Negatives: Monk/Soldier might be an underpowered and understaffed alliance (those teams are the only ones of the six with one team mod)

Option 2D:
Black Mage + Soldier
Dragoon + Monk
Thief + White Mage
• Positives: Nicely balanced, all-new partners
• Negatives: Clustered neutral mods; Dragoon/Monk might be just a bit underpowered

I'm okay with any of these so it's really up to what YOU guys want as members. Would you be disappointed if you had a same alliance as in a previous game? Is power-balancing the most important factor for you? Would you be okay with not having a neutral mod on your alliance? Which setup sounds the most exciting for you? Etc.


[ITEM 3] Masculine/Feminine Dichotomy
Proposing to remove or at the very least change the masculine/feminine dichotomy. Currently, answers to the masculine/feminine dichotomy question have more to do with style/habits than personality, and some people are reluctant to identify any personality types are masculine or feminine because they don't want to feed into stereotypes/generalizations/antiquated notions of male and female and such, or may feel put on the spot because gender is a personal topic for them. There are two options for this one:

Option 3A: Keep the masculine/feminine dichotomy but clarify on the app that it's whether you think traditionally "masculine" or traditionally "feminine" personality traits apply to you more (these traits up to the interpretation of the applicant).
• Rationale: Masculinity and femininity are less narrow/tight than the other dichotomies, so more room for interpretation or complex answers.

Option 3B: Remove the masculine/feminine dichotomy entirely, and then add one (or, I suppose, possibly more) new dichotomy to take its place. One proposed dichotomy is Stoic/Thinking vs. Emotional/Feeling. (If you have a different dichotomy you'd like to see, please comment.)
• Rationale: Gender-neutral language still allows people to talk about their personality along a particular dimension.


[ITEM 4] Soldier Reworking*
Proposing to remove Ashe from the list of Soldiers and add Cecil, Ramza, and Zack.

• Rationale: Ashe is officially a Time Mage; Cecil, Ramza, and Zack are used in vote reasonings by members every so often.
• Arguments Against: People might think of Ashe as a Soldier personality. Ramza may be redundant with Marche; Cecil as a Dark Knight/Paladin might not strictly fit into the Soldier category.


[ITEM 5] Dragoon Reworking*
Proposing to expand the Dragoon class to include some Knight-like characters to give it some more dimension/character examples and also place some popular characters that are currently in an unassigned limbo.

Option 5A: Dragoon = Dragoon + Samurai
For this, Dragoons would get Samurai characters like Auron (FFX) and Cyan (FFVI).

Option 5B: Dragoon = Dragoon + Knight
For this, Dragoons would get all Knight characters, which would include Agrias (FFT), Auron, Cyan, and Steiner (FFIX). Maybe characters like Basch as well, but he's a Paladin so that might be confusing with Cecil as a Soldier...

Option 5C: No change.
Keep the Dragoon class the same.


[ITEM 6] Contest Banner Points
This past game, noticed a problem with large banner sets being worth disproportionately more than small banner sets considering the amount of work that went into each set (once a template is settled on, it becomes less work to do each additional banner). Lots of possible solutions for this one.

Option 6A: Limit the number of banners someone can make to 10 per contest (100 point max) and split the banners amongst multiple volunteers as needed. If there aren't enough volunteers to cover banners for a contest entirely, then allow volunteers to make more than 10 banners.

Option 6B: Limit the number of points someone can get for using a single template to be 10 banners' worth (= 100 points). This means that one volunteer can offer to make more than 10 banners, and will get points for all of them if more than one template is used, or will get points for 10 of them if they all use the same template.

Option 6C: Set a base amount for making banners at all (like say 20 points). Each banner with a new template would be worth 10 points and a banner reusing a template would be worth 5 points. So if someone were to make a set of three banners and they all look vastly different from each other => 50 points. A person making a set of six banners off the same template would get 55 points.


[ITEM 7] Perfect Sorting Bonuses
Okay so this is an idea I just came up with yesterday. I was reminded that The Other Comm (westerosorting) does this thing where you can get bonus points for sorting all the apps within a game. I think it might work to do something like that here -- if you vote on ALL ff_classchange applications within a game, you get maybe an extra 25% bonus? For example, if there were 22 apps in Game 3 and you voted on all of them, at the end of the game you'd earn an extra 55 points for your team. If you joined during Game 3 and there were only four apps after you joined but you voted on all of them, you'd get a bonus 10 points. It might be a nice reward for our members who take care to vote on each and every app (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE). Would people like this?

Rationale: 10 points per vote seems like an appropriate amount but ff_classchange points are still relatively low. This would give people more incentive to stamp people without changing point values.
Arguments Against: Added complexity of needing to track when people joined and what apps they've sorted since then, etc.


[ITEM 8] Scaling Down Ultima Arena
For this one, people generally said UA was still overpowered, so I'm going to scale back a bit. I was wondering what people would like to see.

• Lower participation points -- set lower point values for submitting entries **
• Lower prizes for winning -- scale down the amount of points first/second/third/etc. are worth
• Smaller-scale contests -- contests with lower wordcount caps, fewer icons to submit, etc. so that the entry point scales are the same but the amount of work involved/required by the contest is less
• Fewer placings -- keep the amount of placings to three where possible, even with large voting sets
• Fewer contests -- most likely would keep to the schedule but maybe skip a half-month contest every so often, especially if there's other events going on at the same time
• Other
• Various combinations of the above!

Let me know if I've missed anything.

* Note: Any change in the lists will not affect people's personal sigtags -- you're allowed to use whatever character you like on your tag banners regardless of whether they officially belong to your class.
** Note: In order to achieve lower participation points, this means the rule that you can't get more points by submitting the same entry to moogle_workshop instead of ultima_arena would need to be broken in many cases. By this, I mean that the participation points may dip below what you'd get if you submitted it to moogle_workshop instead. For example, a writing contest may have a word count range of 1000-2500 words but only be worth 75 points as opposed to 100. In this case, crossposting your entry in moogle_workshop after the contest ends would earn you the difference, provided you didn't place in the contest.



[Poll #1782700]

Voting form:
[ITEM 1] Would you like alliances in Game 3? ( ) Yes, I would like alliances ( ) No, I would prefer separate teams ( ) No opinion either way [ITEM 2] If we do alliances, which one(s) would be okay with you? [ ] A. Black Mage+Monk; Dragoon+Thief; Soldier+White Mage [ ] B. Black Mage+Soldier; Dragoon+White Mage; Monk+Thief [ ] C. Black Mage+Thief; Dragoon+White Mage; Monk+Soldier [ ] D. Black Mage+Soldier; Dragoon+Monk; Thief+White Mage [ ] E. None of the above [ITEM 3] What action should be taken regarding the masculine/feminine dichotomy? [ ] Alter the language to make it about traditionally masculine/feminine personality traits [ ] Remove it and add a new Stoic/Thinking vs. Emotional/Feeling dichotomy [ ] Remove it and add a different dichotomy other than the one above [ ] No opinion either way [ITEM 4] Should Ashe be removed from the Soldier list, and Cecil, Ramza, and Zack added instead? [ ] Yes, both changes should be made [ ] No, do not remove Ashe [ ] No, do not add Cecil [ ] No, do not add Ramza [ ] No, do not add Zack [ ] No opinion either way [ITEM 5] Should the Dragoon class be expanded and given a secondary class? ( ) Yes, give them Samurai (Auron and Cyan) ( ) Yes, give them Knight (Agrias, Auron, Cyan, Steiner) ( ) No, keep the Dragoon class as it is ( ) No opinion either way [ITEM 6] Which new system would be good to adopt for contest winner banners? [ ] For a contest, put a limit of 10 banners per bannermaker and split large sets up amongst multiple people; banners remain at 10 points per banner [ ] Give 10 points per banner for the first 10 banners in a template; afterwards they get 0 [ ] Award a base amount of points and 10 points for the first banner in a template and 5 points for each banner thereafter that reuses the same template [ ] None of the above [ ] No opinion either way [ITEM 7] Would you like bonuses for perfect sorting? ( ) Yes, I would like them as proposed above ( ) Yes, but not with a 25% bonus (please comment) ( ) No, there should not be perfect sorting bonuses ( ) No opinion either way [ITEM 8] How should the points given out in <lj site="livejournal.com" user="ultima_arena"> be toned down? [ ] Lower participation points [ ] Lower prizes for winning [ ] Smaller-scale contests [ ] Fewer placings [ ] Fewer contests [ ] Other [ ] None of the above


Feel free to comment with questions, comments, reasonings, etc. Anonymous commenting is allowed.

Comments

[surmise.livejournal.com]

[breyzyyin.livejournal.com]

Personally, I like the idea of a Soldier and Dragoon reworking...since those seem to be the two teams that have kind of a hard time getting defined in terms of characters: for Dragoons the character pool is always very limited (and often gets equated with more popular characters like Kain who aren't necessarily the best overall representation of the class) and for Soldiers, it is almost the opposite and there's *too* wide of a definition...often enough, I see a lot of "I can see you in both Dragoon and Soldier" when people are getting votes for one or the other, so having a more defined character list would probably work well for both teams.

I definitely think putting a few more characters in the Dragoon category makes a lot of sense, and possibly even doing a "Dragoon + Knight/Samurai" would give people more of a placing idea when voting on applications. That being said, I fear it would also take away from potential Soldiers since many seem to use Knight characters when voting for Soldiers since so many of the Knight characters are in military organizations in the games...both teams are pretty small in terms of active members, so I'm not sure doing anything that might risk limiting the potential amount of newcomers for either team would necessarily be fair.

Since characters such as Beatrix and Cecil (two Paladins) are often used as examples when people vote Soldier (and I'm definitely *for* reworking the list to include Ramza and Cecil since most of us on Team Soldier seem to consider them part of the characters that "define" the class)...I wonder if it wouldn't be beneficial to include "Soldier + Paladin" for a rework as well. The Paladin characters like Beatrix and Cecil definitely have personality traits in common with other Soldier characters such as Ramza and Marche, so it would further separate and define how the Dragoon and Soldier teams are different, especially if "Dragoon + Knight/Samurai" ends up happening. There would still be Knight/Samurai characters such as Basch (ignoring his RW job), Onion Knight, Gabranth, Auron, Cyan, and Agrias for the Dragoons if that were the case...but Paladins/Holy Knights such as Frimelda, Cecil, and Beatrix would further showcase the differences between the Soldier and Dragoon classes as they offer very different personalities. That way people will know which Knight characters fit more for Dragoons and which would fit more for Soldiers.

...I hope that made sense? I was just thinking of a common trend I notice when people vote either Dragoon and Soldier, and I could see that being confusing if a character like Cecil is added to the Soldier list but the Dragoons get the "+ Knight" rework too. I do think further defining the two job classes and what characters go into them would be very helpful! ♥

[rayiroth.livejournal.com]

Just out of curiosity, how many members do each class have? This is an non-stats valid observation, within my own Soldier community I think Breyzy is essentially the one person holding the entire place up. That includes myself who occasionally bounces off the internet weeks at a time too. I wonder if it's pretty much the same situation with every group?

Entirely agree with taking away masculine/feminine sorting, consider that was the one I found far to subjective to give a good answer. I like the thinker/feeler one, though "stoic thinker" might be a bit much?

While I love Ashe, I agree that she's not really a soldier. I personally think Cecil's class is more Paladin, but Ramza and Zack? Yes please. I'm inclined to say avoid going for a perceived "personality", as each community itself will be made out of range of people with various personalities anyway.

The UA one is an interesting one - up until now I thought of the other communities being the "side game" of UA being the main thing! I'm quite new at all this, but I wonder if that's telling a bit. Keep in mind that I do go to all of the communities too! Assume I don't have to run off again for the third game (LOL exam period), I certainly would like to participate in UA.

Liking the idea of bonus for all sortings too.

What else... Oh, I am the one for Dragoon + Knights, because in my mind I already sort people accordingly. I also personally found Cecil more a Dragoon+Knight, but not really one or another.

Thank you!

[lightofeilia.livejournal.com]

Sorry to be brief, but I'm pretty much okay with everything here except perfect sorting bonuses, which sounds like it's a lot of work, but if people in charge are okay with that, then that's fine xD

[glacialphoenix]

Okay, long comment about perfect sorting bonuses here:

#1: Voting on 'all the applications' is perfectly possible for our current members, since we get the chance to vote on all of them from the start. What about new members, though? We only open applications once game starts and people join all game round, so those who join later are simply not going to have the opportunity to vote on all the applications, which makes giving a perfect sorting bonus for all applications kind of unfair.

We could solve this by saying that we count 100% as 'all applications since the new member joined', but that might end up being unfair to the older members since someone who joins midway through might only have to vote on 10 applications, compared to the 20 an older member might have to vote on to qualify.

25% also seems a bit much to me? I know some people think 10 points is a bit underpowered especially considering it's difficult to decide, but even a new member who only has to vote on 10 applications would get an extra 25 points out of it. Older members will get more - and that can total up to a few hundred for alliances.