European & North American Twg

ByekaByeka Name changed from Freak83Toronto Join Date: 2003-03-13 Member: 14484Members, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">Seperate games?</div> This is probably one of the hottest TWG issues which is why I don't feel comfertable making a decision for it myself.

The problem is, whether to have two seperate games of TWG running at the same time. One for North Americans, and another for Europeans. The benefit is of course more similar time zones for each of the games which allows easier communication for the players.

Would I personally vote to have this? No. The way I see it, the problems assosiated with having two games like this outweigh the benefits.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<b>Problems</b>
1. IRC channel. This may not be such an issue now as it's kept open but having two TWG games going at once could make things more confusing, especially if both games are trying to discuss at the same time.

2. Game names. Right now we're up to TWG VII. If it splits, does the North American one or European one keep going with the current game numbers, and which one would start back at I? Or would they both keep going with the same game numbers.

3. Game sigs. Similarily, how would you distinguish sigs?

4. Lack of player diversity. Although I'm not insanely worried about having enough players to fill up both games. There's certainly a lack of player diversity assosiated with this. A lot of the people you have played with in the past you would not get to play with any more as you would play with in seperate games from now on.


<b>Benefits</b>
1. More/better communication between players. By playing with seperate time zones communication will be easier with the players as most people will be sleeping at relativly the same time as their fellow players. Likewise they will be awake and active at the same time too.



The way I see it, this isn't a huge problem. It's a minor one and nothing more. Days are generally 48 hours which gives plentiful time for communication amongst all the players in the game. I haven't seen a situation yet where the timezones have been a massive hinderence and personally I believe in "If it's not broken, then don't fix it".

Feel free to discuss.

Comments

  • im_lostim_lost TWG Rule Guru Join Date: 2003-04-26 Member: 15861Members
    Solutions:

    There would need to be different channels, one for each game. That wouldn't be hard to set up.

    For game names, I think it should be TWG <number> <NA/E> (NA for North America, E for Europe). Neither game needs to start over on numbering.

    The sigs used would be the same, but the circles showing which games were won/hosted could have an 'e' or 'n' after the game number.

    I can't think of a good solution for lack of diversity. My original thinking was to have two games just for more players, not distinguished by world region, but that contradicts most of my previous solutions.

    An additional problem is that the people in/near Australia end up being left out.

    I know I was a big proponent of the idea before, but now I'm not sure what to think of it.
  • CrispyCrispy Jaded GD Join Date: 2004-08-22 Member: 30793Members, Constellation
    If you did split them then you could just change the shape of the box that holds the game number, circle, square, triangle.

    I personally wouldn't like to split it because I don't think it's popular enough and small games are wank.

    Better to have a few people left out of a game than everyone stuck in small games :/
  • MouseMouse The Lighter Side of Pessimism Join Date: 2002-03-02 Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    Considering that I'm neither (and that I generally think it isn't a good idea), no.
  • SkySky Join Date: 2004-04-23 Member: 28131Members
    Bah, the current system's worked so far, I think.
  • RenegadeRenegade Old school Join Date: 2002-03-29 Member: 361Members
    I say we give it a try. If it doesn't work then we stick with just one game.
  • im_lostim_lost TWG Rule Guru Join Date: 2003-04-26 Member: 15861Members
    Considering how slow the signups are for a single game (currently at 14 people, nearly 10 hours after signups started), I don't think it's even an option. We need 24 people before it's it's even feasible, and 28 before it becomes worthwhile. I think we should seriously consider having two separate games when there are too many people interested to accomodate into a single game, but not before then.
  • CrispyCrispy Jaded GD Join Date: 2004-08-22 Member: 30793Members, Constellation
    I agree but I wouldn't neccessarily say that waning support for the current TWG is a basis for saying that in general it won't receive enough players.
  • CMEastCMEast Join Date: 2002-05-19 Member: 632Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-im lost+Jul 2 2005, 07:48 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (im lost @ Jul 2 2005, 07:48 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Considering how slow the signups are for a single game (currently at 14 people, nearly 10 hours after signups started), I don't think it's even an option. We need 24 people before it's it's even feasible, and 28 before it becomes worthwhile. I think we should seriously consider having two separate games when there are too many people interested to accomodate into a single game, but not before then. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    QFT

    I think two games could eventually be a valid move but even then, Im not sure if it should be based on location. Rather, if we had two games then one should be straight vanilla twg and one more experimental version.

    I think we've talked about that before Freak83 but just so the others here. However right now we need more players.
Sign In or Register to comment.