UPNetwork

UPNetwork (http://forums.upnetwork.net/index.php)
-   Suggestions and Inquiries (http://forums.upnetwork.net/forumdisplay.php?f=35)
-   -   DQ Revamp Suggestion (http://forums.upnetwork.net/showthread.php?t=7496)

S_M 04-08-2016 10:37 PM

DQ Revamp Suggestion
 
Hi everyone, so something I've been mulling over for a while is how useless the concept of DQing has become. It's supposed to be a strong motivator to promote speedy ordering, but it doesn't seem to work for several reasons. While No DQ fell by the wayside many years ago, and the DQ range now sits between 24-96 hours, these limits are rarely if ever enforced. In fact, if you enforce the DQ time and it hasn't literally been weeks, you're seen as a jerk. Thus DQ has become entirely meaningless. Further, if you're in a gym match, DQing doesn't get you any closer to winning a badge.

This is important for getting matches moving, especially for special matches. Gym matches, tournament matches, and legend challenges are all notorious for being held up by one of the battlers. Gym matches in particular are a critical point, since badges are required to move up in the levels as are reffing gym matches. There are long queues for both gym matches and legend challenges and it's not fair to the people on those queues, either, and the Elite 4 will likely be the same.

Here is my suggestion. Change DQ times to anywhere from 3-10 days, and it would be adjusted to work like this: after the DQ time has passed, the opponent (or referee, maybe?) should bump the thread and message the battler. Then, after the DQ time passes again (so 2x the posted DQ time after it's the person's turn), DQ becomes automatic in the absence of a TA post. The other person may post for a free round, but the referee should be required to enforce the DQ time.

It's not perfect and I know it kind of goes against league culture but I think that it updates a rule that has become completely obsolete. What I think the biggest stumbling block is, is that it would require people to start doing things that in the current state of things would make you look like a jerk. But otherwise nothing is going to happen.

A final thing I wanted to bring up which is somewhat relevant to DQs (but I don't want to derail the more important points I brought up above with this point!!!!) is the concept of the free round. When it was initiated it was supposed to be for Pokemon that were close to being KOed. Now it seems that all of the rules for attacking go out the window and you can literally use any attack you want (eg Blast Burn x3), which would KO a Pokemon which may have more than its health left!! I do not think that the rules for reffing, such as those for energy usage and cooldown periods, should go out the window just because it's a free round.

Sneaze 04-08-2016 11:02 PM

So while DQ really should be automatic for high priority matches, and with recent discussion seems to be heading that way (don't quote me on this), for your run of the mill matches the option really should be given to allow additional time because... well... people forget. I'm not saying a lot of time and if you want you should totally be allowed to DQ them on the spot. But some trainers might not want to do that for whatever reason (needing a certain number of KOs, just generally wanting to fight that specific person, whatever). Outside of this, this is a pretty solid suggestion and not too different from what was being talked about recently.

That said if we do this, 10 days for the high end is actually too much imo. A week should really be the end cap. If you're gone for a full TWO WEEKS and don't have a TA that's just absurd (yes I know I'm guilty of similar, but see the aforementioned forgetting... also bumping isn't something that happens much these days).

Also yeah people need to stop being stupid with DQ rounds. Have some ref integrity and don't let your battlers force you into doing something stupid just because it nets them an extra KO.

Mercutio 04-09-2016 05:24 AM

I actually do agree with Sneezey on the automatic thing. This is just a game. People forget.

With the caveat that if I choose to DQ you over the DQ limit and I have made an attempt to bump you in that time, I should not be seen as a dick for doing it. You knew the match stats, you managed to get DQed, you are the dick.

Of course if you are given a position of responsibility such as being a Gym Leader and you don't order weekly at worst you should feel pretty bad about yourself.

Aposteriori 04-09-2016 10:54 AM

This is an unpopular, popular opinion: If your gym leader fails to post within a reasonable margin of a week tops, then that gym leader deserves to retire from his spot. I'm sorry, I know people are not a fan of DQs, but gym leaders have roles to fulfill and they do the league no favors by keeping the title with none of the responsibility.

I have seen a good DQ implementation for tournaments, and that is a step in the right direction. That same stern behavior should be applied to legend challenges both from the MLC and the challenger. If you cant order in a timely manner, then I don't see it fair to hold up the queue for others.

So

A 1 time 1 week forgiveness for gym leaders, with a standard flat rate of 96 HR dq time: four full days. Forgetfulness means you check the thread periodically to make sure it is not waiting on you. As a gym leader, you potentially carry 3 matches. Just check the right sub-forum, do a click to the last page and verify that the stalling of the match is not due to the gym leader itself. Is it annoying to be responsible? Maybe. It doesn't cost much to just check the thread.

Regular matches should be an amicable behavior between the three parties involved, and generally more laxed. If you state your desires at the beginning of the match, that the DQ time will be strict, then the other trainer should be aware of what he is signing up for. I personally take all of my matches serious, and I do not like lag time in between. That does not mean I'm unreasonable, because people have lives and other problems to deal with. Kuno, for example, is super busy. Once his general activity picks up, I would assume he will continue with our match. The problem becomes people like Cele or Sneaze (dropping names because this is relevant) who are unable to post in a match, yet come into TO and post more than twice a week. Either you cannot post due to lack of access or you can. Don't play with our feelings. Sit down for 5-10 mins and read over what is going on in your match to get a good picture of what you want to order at a later date.

Maybe this last point is a bit harsh and overly critical of people's individual time, but please do not trump everything else said. This is basically my dollar to the issue. I'm much more expensive than just two cents.

Sneaze 04-09-2016 06:23 PM

Yeah no I'm sorry but expecting outright orders within 4 days is absurd. Not everyone can actually order every day. Some of us can, yes, but some are stuck to the weekends. Any way you slice it a limit of a week is really the best way to handle it.

And while you did drop my name, I'm inclined to agree on the matter and would like to propose we actually implement the temporary TO bans from a while back, but in a different manner. If your ref or opponent bumps you via VM after the first DQ bump time S_M suggested comes up, and you continue to post in TO, they then have every right to go to the LOs with said proof. Make it a three strikes you're out rule. Do it for three matches, or multiple times for the same matches adding up to three, and you're banned from TO for a week.

Yes I know that's more work on the LOs but quite frankly if it means things actually moving at a clip that doesn't resemble a glacier then the ends justifies the means. It also means some of our lazier LOs need to get off their butts more.

Aposteriori 04-09-2016 06:25 PM

168 hours sounds icky when you write it out. Sure, lets go with 168 hours!

Thank you S_M for bringing this up.

Sciz 04-10-2016 10:09 AM

How about an incentive for fast-ordering, like there is for fast-reffing? Or is that already a thing?

Aposteriori 04-10-2016 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sciz (Post 742537)
How about an incentive for fast-ordering, like there is for fast-reffing? Or is that already a thing?

Fast ordering has no incentive, and can pose a problem to some refs because it mounts on pressure for them to ref again within 48 hours. I know I tend to be bad about this and order within minutes. Then again, none of the refs have asked me to slow it down just yet.

Connorbacking, instead of piggybacking, on your idea: what if we did introduce a small bonus? Maybe 1 TP for ordering within the DQ time limit or 48 hours? It is a small reward, but it adds up overtime given that 50 of these bad puppies awards a slot.

Ironthunder 04-10-2016 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aposteriori (Post 742539)
what if we did introduce a small bonus? Maybe 1 TP for ordering within the DQ time limit or 48 hours? It is a small reward, but it adds up overtime given that 50 of these bad puppies awards a slot.

tbh it'd probably be fairer if it was done in a manner akin to reffing bonus, so that the incentive to keep ordering vaguely quickly for the whole match is more... intact. Like, if you take longer than three days to order on like, more than a couple of isolated incidents (Perhaps three-strike policy? Maybe altered to fit the reqs of the match, so a 6v6 has more leniency than a 2v2?), then you get half the TP you'd usually get. Or standard and staying within gives double? One or the other.

Jerichi 04-10-2016 06:33 PM

No, no fast ordering bonus. We should not have to hold your hand to get you to participate in the game at the most basic level.

Zelphon 04-10-2016 10:03 PM

I don't think DQs need to be changed so much as the community needs to change its perception of them.

Did your opponent DQ your ass a single day after the the time passed? They aren't a jerk it's your own fault for joining a battle with a schedule you for whatever reason didn't keep to despite knowing full well what it was before creating or accepting the challenge.

Sneaze 04-10-2016 10:09 PM

Yes that is very much a part of the issue, but the archaic maximum 4 day DQ timer certainly doesn't help. Yes, people should try to order quickly. No, people don't always have time or frequently forget, and should at the very least be bumped. Yes, if you've been bumped and proceed to not order afterwards you should be DQ'd. I've sent a full proposal to the LOs and it's being talked over that includes both changes to DQ timers as well as some other nice things.

biggggg5 04-10-2016 10:13 PM

Schedules do change after battles are formed though. I do like Sneaze's idea of TO banning though. If you have time to post in TO you have time to write out a few orders.

Sneaze 04-10-2016 10:17 PM

While I did bring it up and think it's a workable idea should it come to that point, I think TO banning is something that can be applied after everything's said and done with upcoming change. If people continue to not order, they can be temp banned. But we shouldn't necessarily be creating more work for the LOs by being a terrible community. Lord knows there's already enough of that.

Zelphon 04-10-2016 10:17 PM

I disagree with "not having the time” as a valid excuse because frankly you know what the schedule is at the OC thread and shouldn't make or accept a challenge with a low DQ timer if your life is prone to not allowing you to order in small windows.


But yeah caps on DQ times shouldn't exist.

biggggg5 04-10-2016 10:23 PM

Because relatives don't die, school never springs up, work never calls you in, parents never ground you and computers never break

Zelphon 04-10-2016 10:25 PM

TAs exist

Sneaze 04-10-2016 10:33 PM

The problem being that people are afraid of posting short-term TAs. A problem which I've also addressed.

Mercutio 04-11-2016 12:56 PM

Week DQs and an expectation that you should be mature and actually post in battles is perfectly reasonable.

Sneaze 04-11-2016 09:12 PM

So here's a quick rundown of what was sent to the LOs that Jeri likes but wanted me to post here for final thoughts from the community.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sneaze
Cracking down on DQs and changing a decade old system:

- DQ timer may now be set from 1 day to 1 week (not everybody is available every weekday)
- After the DQ timer runs out, the trainer will be bumped via VM by either the ref or the other trainer (people forget sometimes!)
- After the bump, if the DQ timer runs out again, the DQ may be enforced with no chance of repeal (no more silly "I posted before the ref officiated the DQ" ancient rule)
- GLs may set DQ times which apply only to their challenger (see next point as to why)
- Gym Leaders, E4 members, both the challenging trainer and the MLC in Legend matches, and all parties in either Tournaments or Contests will have set a set 10 day DQ, after which they will be immediately DQ'd, with the bump occuring after the 7 day mark (people should be doing what they're supposed to if they expect to run as a major part of the game)
- TA posts will freeze all the aforementioned DQ timers if there is an exact timeframe (duh)

Fast refs we love you! Changes to the current fast reffing bonuses!

- +.25 SP per 'mon for reffing each round within a week (hey this is the same as before!)
- An ADDITIONAL +.25 SP per 'mon for reffing each round within 96 hours, for a total of +.5 SP per 'mon (we appreciating those of you who are fast but not SONICTHEHEDGEGHOGFAST)
- Old +1 SP per 'mon bonus for reffing within 48 hours is being scrapped! Instead, reffing each round within 48 hours removes all the other fast reffing bonuses and gives you a flat 2x bonus to ALL SP EARNED. That's the base 'mon SP, doubles SP, Gym SP, and even special event SP bonuses, all DOUBLED. (NO SERIOUSLY WE LOVE YOU FAST REFS)
- Just as before, TA posts will freeze your reffing timers if you give an exact timeframe (duh)

Discuss.

Jerichi 04-11-2016 09:16 PM

I like this. Do others like this? If so, we'll institute it.

Aposteriori 04-11-2016 09:18 PM

- +.25 SP per 'mon for reffing each round within a week (hey this is the same as before!)
- An ADDITIONAL +.25 SP per 'mon for reffing each round within 96 hours, for a total of +.5 SP per 'mon (we appreciating those of you who are fast but not SONICTHEHEDGEGHOGFAST)
- Old +1 SP per 'mon bonus for reffing within 48 hours is being scrapped! Instead, reffing each round within 48 hours removes all the other fast reffing bonuses and gives you a flat 2x bonus to ALL SP EARNED. That's the base 'mon SP, doubles SP, Gym SP, and even special event SP bonuses, all DOUBLED. (NO SERIOUSLY WE LOVE YOU FAST REFS)

Explain this in terms of a match. Math is involved. Math dude. Math.

Sneaze 04-11-2016 09:23 PM

Okay so currently reffing a match in my Gym, which is doubles, at a rate of every four days would earn you 12 SP for the 6v6. It would be 16.5 for reffing within 48 hours.

Under the change it would be that same 12 SP for within a week, 13.5 SP for within 4 days, and 21 SP for within 48 hours.

Aposteriori 04-11-2016 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sneaze (Post 742994)
Okay so currently reffing a match in my Gym, which is doubles, at a rate of every four days would earn you 12 SP for the 6v6. It would be 16.5 for reffing within 48 hours.

Under the change it would be that same 12 SP for within a week, 13.5 SP for within 4 days, and 21 SP for within 48 hours.

That sounds like crack. Sign me up and make sure you set up a calculator on the main site. So adding to this idea of bonuses and a slight addition to the mix:

I just thought of something fairly interesting. The concept of Weekend warriors:

One week has 7 days. So on average that means a week should see 3.5 (lol) reffings. What if we glob this proportion into something like if the ref did 4 (or 5 to offset the number in a positive upward trend) reffings in the span of one weekend, then this person is considered to have the 48 hour bonus for the week?

If you think about it, it accommodates people who can only ASB on weekends, and it accommodates the bonus all the same because you are getting on average the same amounts of rounds in. It would only work if you arrange with the trainers to help you out and get at least four sets of orders in. Is not that hard really.


If this standalone concept does not work, well I just came up with a nifty overhaul to the reffing badge, and now we have something worthwhile in the form of a purchase.

I sent the idea to Jeri, but let's also discuss it as part of the overhaul I guess.

Slash 04-11-2016 09:26 PM

I like them

EDIT: Not so much trying to tack the new things on. I like them as Sneaze said them


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.