Anvil Game Studios

Author Topic: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)  (Read 6602 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Knightmare

  • Chaplain
  • *
  • Posts: 894
  • paki
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: S.Williamson
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #45 on: September 27, 2017, 11:37:36 am »
So, will you be banning players that use same or similiar tags in the game? What about regiments/clans that dont use threads on game's forums as they dont need it? This forum is not a pre-requisite to form a clan/regiment in a game and asuming it is is giving it power it dont have. Advocating senseless thread bumping just to appear active looks like the best way to clutter the forum with spam.

If this is to protect the forums from senseless drama I understand the reasoning behind this..."rule", but if it would extend to the game or even banning of "offending players" from the official servers that could open a whole new can of worms.
You won't get banned for this definitely,banning is an extreme measure the moderators rather not take, only use in the most needed of situations.

And if you wanna talk about spam,it's just one bump for one day in a week to keep it active,that isn't much spam at all.

For the regiments that have made their groups on steam, well it's unfortunate, doesn't take much time to just reserve a thread on the forums first though.

Offline Charles Caldwell

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 204
  • Retired Founder of the SLRN [Naval Action]
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: [1st L KGL]
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #46 on: September 27, 2017, 01:36:20 pm »
So, will you be banning players that use same or similiar tags in the game? What about regiments/clans that dont use threads on game's forums as they dont need it? This forum is not a pre-requisite to form a clan/regiment in a game and asuming it is is giving it power it dont have. Advocating senseless thread bumping just to appear active looks like the best way to clutter the forum with spam.

If this is to protect the forums from senseless drama I understand the reasoning behind this..."rule", but if it would extend to the game or even banning of "offending players" from the official servers that could open a whole new can of worms.

I was never happy with this imposed rule. As you say it penalises certain groups and isnt flexible.

For the regiments that have made their groups on steam, well it's unfortunate, doesn't take much time to just reserve a thread on the forums first though.

I also would like to forward the scenario of a group that has been established for a number of years in NW, that only now wish to come over to HF will lose their rights to the name purely based on the fact that another group signed on to the forum before them?


Offline CrocHunter

  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • CavGF Co-owner
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #47 on: September 27, 2017, 03:54:31 pm »
I was exagerating about the bans because this is actualy an unenforcable rule. Only should a player/clan/regiment care to make a thread on these forums would they kinda subject to this weird rule. Let say if a NW regiment switch to HF and didnt even knew about these forums existance would it be ok to them to encounter players on servers saying "You cant use this name, I claimed it on the forums, its rightfully mine". Why would they care about what that player says? Why would they be required to make a thread to have a name in the game. What if some clan will use a name for some time without bothering to register here or make a thread and then some months later would another clan with the same or similiar name come in but make a forum thread. Would the first one loose the "rights" to their name? Sounds like nonsense.

I may be used to a different forum culture, but usualy bumping a thread is frowned upon.
Maybe if the community is not able to be mature enough to have threads about their clans without bickering who got it first, then maybe make the crew forum section heavily moderated, allow only informations about the clan and dissallow any discussion in their thread. Might be severe, but it works fine on the ArmA 3 forums.
Nr3 "Griff's Own" Husaren & Infanterie Regiment
Rittmeister Sernis Thausten

Offline Knightmare

  • Chaplain
  • *
  • Posts: 894
  • paki
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: S.Williamson
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #48 on: September 27, 2017, 03:57:50 pm »
I was exagerating about the bans because this is actualy an unenforcable rule. Only should a player/clan/regiment care to make a thread on these forums would they kinda subject to this weird rule. Let say if a NW regiment switch to HF and didnt even knew about these forums existance would it be ok to them to encounter players on servers saying "You cant use this name, I claimed it on the forums, its rightfully mine". Why would they care about what that player says? Why would they be required to make a thread to have a name in the game. What if some clan will use a name for some time without bothering to register here or make a thread and then some months later would another clan with the same or similiar name come in but make a forum thread. Would the first one loose the "rights" to their name? Sounds like nonsense.

I may be used to a different forum culture, but usualy bumping a thread is frowned upon.
Maybe if the community is not able to be mature enough to have threads about their clans without bickering who got it first, then maybe make the crew forum section heavily moderated, allow only informations about the clan and dissallow any discussion in their thread. Might be severe, but it works fine on the ArmA 3 forums.
It would be highly strange for a NW player not to know about the HF forums in the first place, considering how well it is known as the successor to NW at this point.

Well you come from a different community, here everyone is content with bumps, bickering amongst ourselves usually doesn't occurs, the regiment leaders are advised to contact the mods about it first without taking a hand in it.

Offline CrocHunter

  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • CavGF Co-owner
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #49 on: September 27, 2017, 04:18:01 pm »
A NW player may know (and probably does) about HF, but knowing about HF doesnt mean active participation or knowledge about these forums. How would this rule apply to regiments that dont bother with these forums in the first place?
Nr3 "Griff's Own" Husaren & Infanterie Regiment
Rittmeister Sernis Thausten

Offline Dark_Knight

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Midshipman's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 261
  • Faction: French Empire
  • Nick: Darkiii
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #50 on: September 27, 2017, 04:46:58 pm »
A NW player may know (and probably does) about HF, but knowing about HF doesnt mean active participation or knowledge about these forums. How would this rule apply to regiments that dont bother with these forums in the first place?
pillory  8)

Offline DaZZer

  • Standing Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 67
  • Faction: French Empire
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #51 on: September 27, 2017, 06:35:27 pm »
I really like Caldwell's idea about battalions. That way all officers can "own the regiment together" and people dont have to fight over regimental names and they all get to command part of the regiment  + it makes more sense if you rather see cca 50 soldiers on a battlefield which make up a battalion (300-800 according to Wikipedia) rather than a whole regiment as regiment could have 1,000+ soldiers. Holdfast doesn't really have to copy NW's system does it? But in the end, its up to actual players

Offline MrSharkie

  • Surgeon's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 64
  • EastInCo | Commodore
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: Sharkie
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #52 on: October 01, 2017, 12:59:32 pm »
Well, if you create a holdfast regiment you will be on the forums. Simply because you will be booking events so you will know about it either way. So trying to say that a regiment won't be active in the forums does not work as the whole purpose is to bring regiments together and make the community closer. Unless you do not do events in that case just disband as there is no point in being in a regiment.

This is a different game from m&b nw remember that as it means regiments from there do not automatically keep their name. But I like this rule as it allows my fleet to be unique and stand out rather then have multiple fleets with the same . This rule is to help the competeivite scene and to help regs to make their own reputation good!

Offline CrocHunter

  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • CavGF Co-owner
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #53 on: October 01, 2017, 07:02:27 pm »
Even in NW we had regiments not having a thread on FSE or not bothering on FSE and even regiments not having a thread registering and atending events posted on FSE forums or done outside of FSE forums. Even from event organization point we never bothered to check if some regiment have a FSE thread or dont share similiar names and we even knew about some regiments having similiar tags and didnt bother about it.

As mainly a cavalry player and regimental leader majority of events we do are 1v1s and those are arranged outside of forums.

The thing that nobody answered me yet is how this rule would be enforced then? Will it be only on the forums (just to be ignored then) or will it be also enforced in the game?
Nr3 "Griff's Own" Husaren & Infanterie Regiment
Rittmeister Sernis Thausten

Offline Nurdbot

  • Surgeon's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 275
  • Just another old snoddy
  • Faction: British Empire
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #54 on: October 02, 2017, 03:37:57 pm »
You can't really police the internet to that extent, ask the companies and governments trying to combat piracy.

The best you can do really is keep the toxic drama off the forums with the established types and encourage people to maybe be more original with clan names.

Offline Bluehawk

  • Global Moderator
  • Midshipman
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
  • Что делать? Стоять и умирать!
  • Faction: Prussia
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #55 on: October 15, 2017, 08:23:32 pm »
The grace period for "inactivity" has been extended to 2 weeks.

Offline Napoleonic Wars

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
  • 42nd Regiment of Foot/Anglo-Portuguese Army
  • Faction: British Empire
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #56 on: October 17, 2017, 01:06:09 am »
The grace period for "inactivity" has been extended to 2 weeks.
This is perfect! One week was too little!


Offline Norris

  • Standing Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 48
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #57 on: February 20, 2018, 10:16:25 pm »
Quote
Regiment Inactivity
Regiments with no activity on their thread for two (2) weeks can be considered inactive. An inactive regiment which does not reply to a global moderator's private message within a week will have its name up for grabs by younger or later units.

this is a dumb rule in my opinion if there is a growing reg that goes to events and put hard work and dedication into their reg and they don't have the time to post on the forums they shouldn't loose their regiment just like poof gone cause of "inactivity on the forums" thats BS my friend Starwars lost his regiment cause of that and he worked his ass off for that regiment no one should have to loose a good reg cause of FORUMS

Offline Jack

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 2409
  • 33rd | SjtMaj | Charles Hay
  • Faction: British Empire
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #58 on: February 20, 2018, 10:28:38 pm »
Quote
Regiment Inactivity
Regiments with no activity on their thread for two (2) weeks can be considered inactive. An inactive regiment which does not reply to a global moderator's private message within a week will have its name up for grabs by younger or later units.

this is a dumb rule in my opinion if there is a growing reg that goes to events and put hard work and dedication into their reg and they don't have the time to post on the forums they shouldn't loose their regiment just like poof gone cause of "inactivity on the forums" thats BS my friend Starwars lost his regiment cause of that and he worked his ass off for that regiment no one should have to loose a good reg cause of FORUMS
I do agree with you to some extent but it must be viewed in a way that people need to know if regiments are still going and if people really are putting effort into their regiment then they'll want to show people they are still going even if it means making a small post on the thread once or twice every week or so. It even states that a formal message will be sent to check on the activity so you even have the chance to prevent it all you would need to do is to turn on notifications so the message is sent to your email etc.

Offline Blaze

  • Server Administrator
  • Midshipman's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 896
  • Faction: British Empire
Re: New rules regarding regimental names (open for discussion)
« Reply #59 on: June 09, 2018, 09:59:00 pm »
Quote
Regiment Inactivity
Regiments with no activity on their thread for two (2) weeks can be considered inactive. An inactive regiment which does not reply to a global moderator's private message within a week will have its name up for grabs by younger or later units.

this is a dumb rule in my opinion if there is a growing reg that goes to events and put hard work and dedication into their reg and they don't have the time to post on the forums they shouldn't loose their regiment just like poof gone cause of "inactivity on the forums" thats BS my friend Starwars lost his regiment cause of that and he worked his ass off for that regiment no one should have to loose a good reg cause of FORUMS

It takes less than 2 minutes to post a reply saying "I'm active"