• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      TOS Change regarding the Forums   11/23/2018

      Rule 23 is in discussions.  The official change will come out soon.  It will go effect Jan 1st. As it stands from this point.  Political and religious posts are allowed in off topic.  Be mindful to be respectful to each other.   That is all for now. Thank you for your continued support and patience.
XOOM

How can we get beyond pure negativity in the forums?

206 posts in this topic

We’re going to provide an update here at the Rat Chat shortly to clear things up, regarding HE.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I derailed a little. 

I think the best we can do to tone down the toxic aspect in the forum is.

Once you want to react , reread what you wrote then really think about it and maybe just maybe not post it after all. Or really tone it down . Or just stay away from the Forums but I don't think that is supposed to be the goal.

I tend to rather stay away or just read and try really try not to post.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google forced people to answer a simple math question before sending an email. It statistically proved to stop toxic emotive impulsive mails. 

So from now before posting everyone will write down the answer to the equation 

72/8 = ?

:D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, erasmo said:

They are called "toxic people".

 

Correct. The question posed by xoom has no answer. Normally you avoid toxic people and go on your merry way. Here, and in Walmart, you invite them in. The question should be,,, how do we at CRS do a better job handling toxic people. What is the correct response to unreasonable anger?

On a deeper level, what have we done to create these toxic people and how can we (CRS) put water on the fire instead of fuel?

Simply asking an aggressive poster to police his responses is a recipe for disaster. AKA fuel.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zebbeee said:

Google forced people to answer a simple math question before sending an email. It statistically proved to stop toxic emotive impulsive mails. 

So from now before posting everyone will write down the answer to the equation 

72/8 = ?

:D

you might aswell permaban me :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what's the solution here? It's not fixing issues for sure.

When issues will be fixed, new people will come, old vets might return, so the ' five or ten or fifteen or twenty talking heads yelling at each other' won't be so vocal then.

It's not 'their game', It's Rats game, and Rats should do what is necessary to get the playerbase in shape again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sudden said:

Correct. The question posed by xoom has no answer. Normally you avoid toxic people and go on your merry way. Here, and in Walmart, you invite them in. The question should be,,, how do we at CRS do a better job handling toxic people. What is the correct response to unreasonable anger?

On a deeper level, what have we done to create these toxic people and how can we (CRS) put water on the fire instead of fuel?

These are some questions I am already asking, and they're the good ones. That said, communication is a two-way street. 

We really do understand that people need to vent, but the manner in which they vent, and the level of toxicity that you and some of the other are posting, really does matter. There are some certain lines that shouldn't be crossed. I get it, we're passionate, that is the primary source of fuel for why we have a bunch of folks at CRS doing what they do under extraordinary circumstances, and why many of you continue to support us.

But we're a team, and we need to give each other the benefit of the doubt that we all want to achieve a positive outcome for WWII Online. We're tied at the hip, we need to be on the same wave length and work together.

We're not going to meet everyone's expectations, we'll make some mistakes and correct them as best as we can (because we're human), but we'll always be as transparent as we can be and be honest. Our best interest is the betterment of everything here. We have a lot of expectations from you all because there's a lot of different demographics and styles of game play and supporting systems that go into all of this. That's okay, but we gotta be realistic with what we got. Do know our team at CRS is doing great things with big limitations.

Anyway feel like I'm about to beat the horse dead. I think these are important reminders though because it's easy to assume things have miraculously improved with staffing and resources. With the speed in which our team has been providing content and fixes, for that matter, the frequency, it'd be very easy to assume these things have improved dramatically. Unfortunately they have not but the team we DO we have is producing quite a bit of great stuff.

Not for my personal benefit, but for them, please do encourage the CRS folks we have when you can. They're top shelf. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dre21 said:

...one thing I was really looking forward too and waiting for was the HE audit . Now that's just a puff in the air and it will stay the same .

This is not true Dre, not sure if my postings have come along this way. It seems I have been very foot in mouth about this whole topic and I'm going to start reeling back personally from discussing it because, although I've handled comms very well for many different subjects for quite some time, something went wrong here on this one, and the onus is on me.

Please attend the Rat Chat, @HATCH will provide a full comprehensive analysis on what we've done, why we've done it, where we're going, and why we're doing it.

I'll state for the record that I personally initiated and green lit the movement towards getting more to a ground truth realism as much as we can. When I talk about game limitations, I mean specifically any game can only allow us to do too much.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not accept hearing about realism while there is in the game selective bombs,
those that only kill enemies...


Where is realism?

FF ON already!

 

Stop with children's game!!!!

S!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, kareca said:

FF ON already!

so when some noob plops a satchel on your stug cause he dont know what it does, or your commander gets taken out in some MG crossfire
or wayward bullets from some friendly pilot in the air, or your squads entire armor column gets wiped out due to an over eager new pilot seeing what he though was a column of enemy tanks, so ya know, he let eggs fly, or the infantry group you did not see but that you just took out with that 105mm HE
you lobbed at the enemy truck, etc etc.

Every TK will become a grief report, people will be afraid to even play for fear of killing some team mate that they did not even see.
and real griefers will probably come in droves, and the amount of babysitting needed would probably be monumental

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 to Merlin

There is 'realism' and there is 'game'...... there needs to be balance between 'realism' and 'game' so the game is fun to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

so when some noob plops a satchel on your stug cause he dont know what it does, or your commander gets taken out in some MG crossfire
or wayward bullets from some friendly pilot in the air, or your squads entire armor column gets wiped out due to an over eager new pilot seeing what he though was a column of enemy tanks, so ya know, he let eggs fly, or the infantry group you did not see but that you just took out with that 105mm HE
you lobbed at the enemy truck, etc etc.

Every TK will become a grief report, people will be afraid to even play for fear of killing some team mate that they did not even see.
and real griefers will probably come in droves, and the amount of babysitting needed would probably be monumental

So do not talk realism...

 

Realism:
first bombing,
then infantry and armor.
this is realism!

Do not throw a bomb in the AB, kill all the enemies and your friends capture bker
Ridiculous.

until Counter Strike has FF on..lol game for kids...

No pseudorealism!

S!

 

Edited by kareca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my early days  I had once blown a building with someone inside that really was getting exhausting. Could have received a warning or a temporary ban, but God that felt good. :ice_cream:

Didn’t MLs’ pistols serve that purpose IRL?

Could still give negative rank points and put a mission chat message when it happens. And limit FF to mission members.

suggested it as intermission option, as it is an existing game command that ohm can activate within seconds (FF with negative rank points)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sudden said:

Friendly fire would not be fun at all.

Friendly fire would be great until a point, within the first 10 minutes, when the first exploit occurs

 

Then there'd be a great disturbance in the Barracks, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible will happen

th?id=OIP.fu7P4ppnSGqVlI7_sdujEQHaDM

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*F F on* maybe for an intermission but that's about it. In game would be a terrible idea. 

 

Or maybe only Bombs as FF but again only as an intermission. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, XOOM said:

the level of toxicity that you and some of the other are posting, really does matter.

 

 

You had me at "you" I was thinking of leaving anyway and I will as soon as I get back from Walmart where they listen to customer complaints and manage to keep them as customers.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wall of text is clearly needed here.

https://experiencematters.blog/2016/08/17/my-latest-9-recommendations-for-nps/

 

Quote
  1. The choice of metric is not as important as people think. We rarely see a company succeed or fail based on the specific metric that it choses. That doesn’t mean that you can chose a ridiculous metric, but most reasonable metrics provide the same potential for success (and failure). In general, NPS is a reasonable metric to chose, as our data shows that it often correlates to customer loyalty. As organizations mature, we try to get them to use metrics that are more closely aligned to their brand promises.
  2. Driving improvements is what’s critical. Instead of obsessing about the specific metric being used, companies need to obsess about the system they put in place to make changes based on what they learn from using the metric. Successful NPS programs systematically take action on insights they uncover. If the program is working well, then the company isn’t debating scores. Instead, they’re continuously making changes to create more promoters and eliminate detractors.
  3. Promoters & detractors need their individual attention. The most important thing you can do with NPS is to understanding what is driving NPS. It turns out that the things that create promoters are not just the opposite side of the issues that create detractors. So you need to separately identify changes to create promoters and decrease detractors. All too often, companies focus just on detractors. This helps to fix problems, but it does not identify opportunities to propel your organization. By focusing on what causes promoters, you will get the opportunity to engage the organization in uplifting discussions—instead of just beating the drum about what’s broken.
  4. Sampling patterns really, really matter. The approach for sampling often has a very significant impact on NPS results (and results from other metrics as well). If you have multiple segments of customers and they each have a different NPS profile (as many do), then your overall NPS can change wildly based on the mix of those customers that are included in the NPS calculation. In B2B, this may come from combining results from enterprise accounts with smaller clients, or mixing responses from executive decision makers and end users of your products. In B2C, the variance may come form mixing data between new customers and repeat customers.
  5. NPS is for relationships, not transactions. Asking people if they would recommend a company isn’t a good question to use after an interaction. If a customer is a detractor on an NPS survey deployed right after a call into the contact center, for instance, then it doesn’t necessarily mean that there was a problem with that interaction. The contact center might have done a great job on the call, but the customer may still dislike something else about the company. If the contact center interaction had been problematic, then the customer’s NPS score might be temporarily lowered and not reflective of the customer’s longer-term view of the company.
  6. NPS is for teams, not individuals. Since NPS asks about the likelihood to recommend a company, it actually reflects the actions of more than one person. So if you want to look for someone to hold responsible for NPS results, think about making it a shared metric across a large group, not an individual KPI. Many companies that fall in love with NPS, start applying it to every part of their business, trying to give everyone their own NPS. While it’s worthwhile to look for improvements across the business based on NPS, you run into problems when you try to create to many levels of NPS.
  7. Compensation can be a real problem. When an organization shares a common metric (like NPS) and its people collectively have some compensation tied to it, then it can help align everyone’s focus on customer experience. But if the compensation gets too significant, then people start focusing too much on the number—questioning its validity and strong-arming customers—instead of looking for ways to make improvements. Remember, the majority of your discussions should be about making improvements, not data.
  8. Target ranges make more sense than single numbers. NPS is an inherently jittery metric; there’s only a porous line keeping passives from becoming promoters or detractors. And the situation is magnified by the sampling issues described above. That’s why we see many customer insights group wasting a lot of time running around trying to explain small movements in their companies’ NPS, as executives overreact to small movements. Instead of setting NPS goals as a specific number, consider defining a range (similar to a process control chart). As a start, think about adopting a 3- to 5-point range. That way you only react to results outside of the range or multiple periods of increases or declines.
  9. There are four loops to close. When people talk about closed loop and NPS, they often mean contacting customers after they answer the NPS question. But that immediate response is just one what we call the four customer insight-driven action loops: Immediate response, corrective action, continuous improvement, and strategic change. Any NPS program should put in places processes to close all four loops.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of it is frustration, likely. For example, the game's population is in pretty bad shape; and Steam, in which so many had perhaps an unfair amount of faith as far as being a solution is concerned, didn't go so well. On top of that you have the obvious other issues like HC and the HE issue. This is a platform to let that frustration out for many.

Edited by gt3076r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FF on equals an already niche game becoming an even more closed niche game. The game has a steep enough learning curve for new people coming in with all the seasoned vets ready to chew them up. Most of us even returning vets like myself learned the game along with everyone else when it was new. Look at the viewpoint of someone trying this game out for the first time. What is the hook to keep them here long enough to get them over the hump of frustration to fun. You turn friendly fire on, and that adds realism for sure but it also adds another layer of frustration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

make the game fun, stop nerfing and restricting the players for the sake of balance or philosophy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.