JerseyJohn Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 A few days ago I was becoming annoyed that there was so much repitition in these things and brought back two forums started in October and November. Findeng them became a problem despite the fact I knew exactly what I was looking for! Your map and convoy ideas, for example, are exactly what Immer Etwas and myself were talking about in postings to the North Atlantic forum which was brought back and is probably still on this page, along with North America , which was also brought back. There are dozens of forums started by others that should also be brought back and if I knew where to find them without going completely crazy in the process I would. Unfortunately, short of having an official site librarian/archiver and some system for classifying suggestions, this write it and forget about it situation will continue. I think it would be far preferable if we had permanent areas devoted to specific parts of the games where, before posting, a member could browse along and check to see what others would already have said on that same topic. Perhaps have the first twelve forum spots as permanent and unmovable areas with preset and unchangable headings such as map , Ground Units, Air Units , Naval Units , Research etc and etc, with the last two being open categories divided into two distinct subjects, I don't know what they'd be and there's no reason for me to speculate as everyone's opinions should be considered. That way instead of repitition and rewordings we'd have expansion on earlier suggestions and a much more interesting data base to work from. The flip side regarding the present system is I believe Hubert and Bill and perhaps a few others actually keep track of these things and pick out the ones that are possible to implement. In Wolfe's earlier thread, for example, there were 26,490 feasable suggestions and 64,926 that weren't. Not a bad ratio. Of course, someone or perhaps several people should have access to such forums to remove irrelevant or disruptive postings and help keep it orderly. These monitors should not be empowered to edit other people's entries, it should be an all or nothing matter of removing things that would be obviously off topic or offensive, etc., and which would only serve as clutter. If it were set up in the spirit I propose and was actully operational I'd be glad to be among those volunteering. [ December 22, 2002, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 Your problem would be a zero problem if the Battlefront people just moved to using software that allowed the option to get an email notice when a thread was posted to. In that way, you would always know when a new comment was made to a thread that you were interested in. Only the first post generates an email response normally (for forums that use this software). But don't expect Battlefront to give you useful dynamic software soon, you can't even get decent moderation, let alone dynamic software for the forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted December 23, 2002 Author Share Posted December 23, 2002 Les the Sarge 9-1b As usual I can't argue with you and never attempt to, you know what you're talking about. Not even hoping for what you're suggesting, though of course I'd take it a second, a no brainer! My suggestion is the more stone age apporach but one that I'm sure could be set up and maintained with a minimum of effort and expense by the site. [ December 22, 2002, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hueristic Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 I have yet to see a sticky thread here. Does this software not support them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fubarno Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 A "sticky" thread that stays at the top of the page would be a good thing for some recurring forum topics. Ten or twelve sticky threads might be a little excessive and crowd the first page but a range of 3-6 might be Optimal. [ December 23, 2002, 01:18 AM: Message edited by: Fubarno ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 The flip side regarding the present system is I believe Hubert and Bill and perhaps a few others actually keep track of these things and pick out the ones that are possible to implement. I believe Hubert is keeping a list and checking it twice, deciding which ideas are naughty and nice. I'm not; I just have a very long memory of various suggestions that have been made repeatedly since back in April. I've often mentioned that we need to be patient at this point while Hubert sorts through all the various ideas and figures out what the scale and scope of SC2 will be. He reads the forum and he knows. There's plenty of material already, and many ideas are appropriate for a certain type of game while others are not. Except for some generic issues like the political model, we can not rationally debate what may work and what won't until Hubert presents us a strawman of what the draft SC2 looks like. And that's frustrating for us for now, and I fear we're spinning our wheels. My suggestion is that we settle down and accept SC as it is. Focus on game strategies, scenario mods, AARs and stuff like that. Take our game duscussions to a more mature level, like the old Avalon Hill magazine The General provided for us. When he's ready, Hubert should present us a list of planned enhancements for SC2, and we can offer additional ideas at that point BASED ON the proposed design changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted December 23, 2002 Author Share Posted December 23, 2002 Bill "When he's ready, Hubert should present us a list of planned enhancements for SC2, and we can offer additional ideas at that point BASED ON the proposed design changes." I don't doubt that wisdom for a minute. On the other hand I think it would be good if the contributors had a more efficient way of organizing their ideas so as to avoid the repitition and pointless rephrasing so rampant at present. Which is not something I mean in a negative way; probably I'm among the worst cuprits, I've suggested tons of things and I know very few of them were truly original. Had I been able to see previously posted suggestions that were similar or identical to my own, I wouldn't have added to the backlog. Instead I'd have focused on something more productive. While it's good that a handful of key contributors like yourself have long memories and analytical minds, it doesn't help the general membership who are not going to read hundreds of past forums and thousands of old postings to see what has already been discussed! I can also remember pretty far back, though I haven't been around very long, and it's hard for me to backtrack and ferret out old suggestions. Past forums tend to fade and vanish quickly and forget about locating old postings! All of which is hampered by the fact that there's no system of naming these things. Often I'll recall an excellent idea someone presented about, battleships, and it can't be found because it was posted in a forum entitled, Forgotten Research of the Third Republic (title hypothetical). It seems impossible that the process would be hindered with more efficient organization. It can only gain through it. There is a lot of good information (along with a lot of braindead junk) but it's all hidden in a library without a filing system. [ December 23, 2002, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 And u thought I was just kiddin when I suggested a centralized idea governing body. I was! Well maybe I wasn't! Sorta! I agree with Bill there's not much to do right now until Hubert gives us direction. But you(JJ) are right on (master of clarity). To make SC2 the best, we need the benefit of all the good stuff that has been suggested here and it needs organization. But who's got the time and does this forum format support such an endeavor? Currently I can only ponder in the generalities of SC2(would you've ever guessed it!)that would create replay resiliency. Perhaps the "scissor, paper, rock" syndrome that forever instills indecision in us humans. Knowing that for every strategy we devise there will always be a relevant counter strategy for our opponent. Hoping that this perspective will not make any part of SC2 irrelevant in the way that "the Atlantic", "North Africa", gunlaying radar etc. did for SC1. How is this accomplished? Don't ask me, I'm just a simple guy that lives by KISS, this post has already given me a headache. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konstantin V. Kotelnikov Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 Several of the forums that I visit on a semi-occassional basis have a FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) thread locked at the top of their message boards. They split up the questions and had several of the members write answers to them. Then they collected them and posted them all together. Worked slicker than snot as far as I can tell. It didn't completely cut out repetative posts cause some folks just wouldn't read it. However, it cut them down. Is that something that would work here? Yes? No? Maybe So? I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 The Battlefront forum might have to be redesigned to handle "stickies" and other fixed items that we see on other forums. However, the Strategic Command page does have a FAQ button that could be updated to include the latest user manual changes plus numerous Q&As. Or perhaps rename the current one to "User Manual" and add a new button for genuine FAQs. Additionally, Hubert and/or Otto might consider FAQ and strategy articles to be posted on their sites. Now that the "final" patch is out and new customers are burning up the phone lines with orders for SC, some way to bring all the newbies up to date quickly should be considered. Hubert posted an excellent thread a while back about Allied strategy in the early years. Now, if we can just get him to write a few more articles like that ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolzemFrumFloppen Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1b: But don't expect Battlefront to give you useful dynamic software soon, you can't even get decent moderation, let alone dynamic software for the forums.Is there anything at all you DO like at/by Battlefront? Besides me, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaWolf_48 Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 Great idea KVK! The FAQ idea that is. My favorite german. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted December 23, 2002 Share Posted December 23, 2002 Anything I DO like, hmmm. I like a small portion of the posters. I come back which means I haven't given up, yet. I just wish Battlefront would wield some power and just MAKE the forums better. Why wait for the inmates to reform. Hubert for instance, he should be working on the game, not wasting his time answering every darned question (that gets asked yet again and again and again). Moderators should be moderating, and agressively. No one is going to cry and whine if the jerks morons and imbeciles are given the boot and kept out. The forum should policed yes policed. Posts and threads that don't measure up should be deleted, not locked. The sticky issue yes there would be some definite measure of benefit. I have yet to find a grand strategy game out there outside of SC. This is it. Its a unique opportunity, but I think it is being squandered right now. The forum needs to radically shape up before another company comes out with competition. It can happen eh. SC is not such a spectacular game, that someone else can't do it equally well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted December 24, 2002 Author Share Posted December 24, 2002 SeaMonkey ". . . How is this accomplished? Don't ask me, I'm just a simple guy that lives by KISS, this post has already given me a headache." But if you be simple you also be profound. Anyhow, there's plenty to be said for simplicity. To quote that old washing machine commercial, Fewer parts means fewer breakdowns! Why just look at this baby, simple, solid, and in reference to the theme of this forum, the nearest thing man has to permanent! [ December 23, 2002, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted December 24, 2002 Share Posted December 24, 2002 Back to the original thought, why can't Strategic Command have 5 sub-forums like Combat Mission?? Add one for SC2, which for now would be for development ideas and other suggestions beyond SC1. And add similar sub-forums for Tips & Tricks and for Scenario Talk. That should be easy to implement ASAP. Anybody from Battlefront listening?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted December 24, 2002 Author Share Posted December 24, 2002 Bill, "Add one for SC2, which for now would be for development ideas and other suggestions beyond SC1. And add similar sub-forums for Tips & Tricks and for Scenario Talk. That should be easy to implement ASAP. Anybody from Battlefront listening??" I hope so! The twelve forum figure was on the basis of one for each research area and two for miscelaneous areas. It could just as easily be, say, six; doube up on researches and one miscelaneous -- anything would be prefferable to the present bottomless pit ideas are simply tossed into! [ December 24, 2002, 07:32 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts