Level requirement to create clans

[Solidusbucket]

Ahh, gotcha. Yea that makes sense.

On that note, do you think the friend list is kind of the same thing?

[Arturo Sanchez]

Ahh, gotcha. Yea that makes sense.

On that note, do you think the friend list is kind of the same thing?

New players don't tend to have a big list. The friend list suffices and for a chat, creating a party chat works.
That being said clan chat is seldom used really seeing as skype and teamchat and mumble exist.

Clans are generally more of a friends among friends list. Albeit barely (since steam friends list is a thing). But what I do know is. High level players that run them, have them actually function. As opposed to the baby clans that just die within a few days of being born because their leader isn't really competent enough to manage people.

They form these little noob cliques, get crushed by vets and then leave. While if its encouraged for new players to join clans via this hi lvl system. People that join a clan are guaranteed a teacher.

Thus creating a system far better than this "novice partnership" nonsense.


Its good to have options for everyone. But I'm not gonna nod my head and agree that all given options are equal in merit. Noob clans rarely prosper, and are as much dead weight as its memberships. It doesn't encourage growth and development  and community.

[Richard LeMoon]

baby clans
leader isn't really competent
little noob cliques
People that join a clan are guaranteed a teacher.
Noob clans rarely prosper
dead weight

This pretty much sums up why you should have no say in how clans are formed, ever.

[Lu Lu]

Was the  nice spirit of the community patched out in the last update?

Why is it that instead of discussing an idea on solely its merits and flaws, we are instead at each other's throats?

I would like to try to steer us back on path with the original topic

Level Requirement to Create Clans:

Pro:

-Prevents cluttering of Clan Registry, and frees up a lot of otherwise unused clan tags
-Encourages novices to mingle more and as a result, meet more experienced players
-Potentially increase skill of new players faster, as instead of fighting with other new players, they'll likely see some more actual air combat
-Help players stay.  It is annoying when everyone else in a new clan stops playing, and can discourage you from playing, by joining clans that are already established, there will likely always be someone familiar to play with

Con:

-May be seen as unfair by people who wish to unite together under their own clan
-As a clan has no actual gameplay effects, is there even a need to regulate them?
-Can reduce game "stickiness," that is, novices may leave because they cannot unite under their own banner

These are the point that I see in this idea.  Looking at it objectively, I feel as though a clan level requirement would be beneficial overall.

[Richard LeMoon]

You are wrong about the pros.

Point one: Frees up clan tags for what? The clans no one is making because they are only joining the very few established clans? The clutter of the clan registry is the fault of the devs, not people making clans. Add in some basic 'sort by' boxes to fix it.

Point two: No. This is the opposite of what you want to do when introducing a group of friends to the game. This game has a high social curve to start. Making it higher will do nothing for player retention.

Point three: For the players that stay, sure. For the ones you already chased off with seemingly clan elitism, no.

Point four: This is even more the case when an 'established' clan quits, so is not a valid argument. More people have quit this game because a large clan dissolved than because small clans dissolved. Most new people quit for other reasons.

[Hoja Lateralus]

To rephrase the basics:
Problem: Large amount of small clans which are often abandoned and take-up the names and clantags.
Proposed solutions:
  a) change the required members for clan (from original 5)
  b) introduce lvl requirement for creating clans
  c) propose some way to regain names and clantags from inactive clans

I think we may need 2 or even 3 of those, actually. Firstly:
  a) 5 members is awkward as hell, but then again I think 8 is too many. Either back it down to 4 and embrace the clan swarm (about that in a moment) or I say raise it up to 6 because it's less awkward than 5, it's two ships with almost-full crew or one full ship and captain+one crewmember. Both of those options are equally valid for me.
  b) Level requirement is scary as hell for some people, but it can be as low as, I dunno, 5. I think some symbolic compromise would be that non-novice players can join clans, but they can't create them. For novice time (like, what, 10 hours of gameplay?) they'd have to manage with friendlist and party capabilities.
Edit: What if we did a cruel joke and only let people make clans after they have finished tutorial? Mwahahaha
// Personal note - I think there is something in keeping the clanlist clean, because I know I joined a mostly inactive clan once and felt weird. Literally for a week I was the only guy online.
  c) As someone suggested, just [If clan has less than {minimum required} members for 3 (or 6 perhaps?) months - disband that clan] thing. But what if clan has members but all of them are inactive? Huh, I guess some percentage of activity requirement? Like if for X amount of time less than Y% of people logged in then disband clan? More humane would be to just put a warning first. Throw in your ideas, but I think this is the best thing we can do.

Also, clan has some capabilities that have effect on gameplay. This is like friendlist-PRO, becuase you can set some kind of rules and restrictions for joining your clan and form for instance a band of 1000+ matches vets who crewform together, which is op in pubs. But unlike friendlist you don't have to know all those people, every clan member once in a while adds someone and that person serves as a friend-PRO for all the clan.

[Arturo Sanchez]

You are wrong about the pros.

Point one: Frees up clan tags for what? The clans no one is making because they are only joining the very few established clans? The clutter of the clan registry is the fault of the devs, not people making clans. Add in some basic 'sort by' boxes to fix it.

Point two: No. This is the opposite of what you want to do when introducing a group of friends to the game. This game has a high social curve to start. Making it higher will do nothing for player retention.

Point three: For the players that stay, sure. For the ones you already chased off with seemingly clan elitism, no.

Point four: This is even more the case when an 'established' clan quits, so is not a valid argument. More people have quit this game because a large clan dissolved than because small clans dissolved. Most new people quit for other reasons.

Time to play devil's advocate here.

Point 1 is implying the extreme opposite. So... if people join a big clan like say that angry joe army one or grox. What's the issue here? What is the issue of a big clan? Plus should people feel like a clan is too big. Often times senior members of said clan leave and reform their own, many vets who have their current clans are usually branches of the 5 major old guard clans. So what is the issue here? Plus its blatantly ignoring the inherent problem of dead clans filling up the registry. And the big problem is the sheer size of these compared to ACTIVE CLANS. If active clans out number the dead ones. Its kind of a step forward you genius.

Point 2. Going by your friend introduction thing. Wouldn't that friend be invited into the clan or join crew forms (to then eventually join) in the first place? What scenario are you playing in your head where a friend that's introduced isn't introduced to the regulars the inviter flies with?

But let's look at a different scenario. New player joins. Plays the game and finds people they like and friends them, after playing awhile they level up and form a clan. But before that they organise via the friendlist and use the party system. Or starts playing with x clan and gets a good thing going with the members, guy joins the clan.

Point 3. People that leave were always going to leave. They saw a game on steam costing them pennies, logged in and played for a bit but didn't like it. It happens. Because teamwork is hard. The game is very niche in a medium thats mostly fascinated with the solo hero power fantasy since 1985. Welcome to reality. COOP isn't for everyone.

[Richard LeMoon]

There are not enough facepalms. My suggestion was to automatically release dead clan names after a certain time. That solves all problems of 'clan clutter'.

You really need to work on your reading comprehension. I wrote 'introduced', not 'invited'. When you and friends join a game for the first time, you are being introduced to the game BY the game, not by some in-crowd. That is one of the reasons GOIO bleeds new players. It is bad at introducing. Getting all elite-y about clans would only make that worse.

Your counter to point three is pure BS. Everything influences whether a person leaves or stays in a place or community. A single interaction can make a difference. You have a very simple-minded and shallow caricature of the reasons people do what they do. For example, if I had met you on the first day, my chances of hanging around would have been severely diminished. I would have thought, "Great, another community full of morons."

[Arturo Sanchez]

facepalm a little harder, and several times.

You need a few slaps.

Your suggestion does solve it from a systematic point but from a community point, it still doesn't create that bridge between vets and noobs. Noobs clans will be born and noob clans will die like third world child mortality rates.

And introduced or invited... splitting hairs much? Same goddamn thing, you tell someone to try something, both can be said to be introduced and invited. And don't even put all the blame on vets by your wording. I personally hate interacting with noobs simply because of a large number of them simply being unresponsive.

Just the other day I was explaining in huge detail why a person's galleon has no killing power. I challenged the logic in the build and I explained the flaws in that logic. And when the "I'm just having fun" card came up as it all too often does. I simply stated that its not fun to crush someone with little to no effort. Because when the match started my ship didn't even get a single hull break on it as I hovered in place and ripped each ship a new one. And I was using the barebones metamidion that has been heavily nerfed. Where a much better built galleon could crush the piece of crap I flew.

Madzela was around to vouch this. Despite a vet's best efforts to BE inviting some people just reject it.

Everything influences whether a person leaves or stays in a place or community. A single interaction can make a difference.

Which is it? the former or the latter. Calling my point BS. And then immediately coming up with this golden nugget.

[Richard LeMoon]

People rarely agree with you. People have left the game because of you and the hostile atmosphere you create. Almost every player I know has you on their block list. Your clan is never around that I can see. You hate playing with new people, insisting that they are somehow less than you. You may hate playing with 'noobs', but most of the people I know hate playing with you, and would rather have the noobs. I really don't understand where you think you are in a position to judge why anybody does anything, or how they should be managed.

You have severe reading comprehension problems if you think the line you quoted contradicts itself. You also have severe context issues with definitions since you are still not able to understand the differences in the usage of 'introduce' and 'invite'.

1. bring (something, especially a product, measure, or concept) into use or operation for the first time.

This is the definition for 'introduce' that you can't seem to grasp. Let me give you two sentences that may help you figure it out.

"I was first introduced to the ships of GOIO when I downloaded it and played a match. I then invited three of my friends to play."

"I was first invited to the ships of GOIO when I downloaded it and played a match. I then introduced three of my friends to play."

Same thing, right?

How about another one, since you are hung up on the definition of a human 'introducer'.

"I would like to introduce you to my clan."

'I would like to invite you to my clan."

Still the same thing, am I right?

[Newbluud]

[Lu Lu]

People rarely agree with you. People have left the game because of you and the hostile atmosphere you create. Almost every player I know has you on their block list. Your clan is never around that I can see. You hate playing with new people, insisting that they are somehow less than you. You may hate playing with 'noobs', but most of the people I know hate playing with you, and would rather have the noobs. I really don't understand where you think you are in a position to judge why anybody does anything, or how they should be managed.

You have severe reading comprehension problems if you think the line you quoted contradicts itself. You also have severe context issues with definitions since you are still not able to understand the differences in the usage of 'introduce' and 'invite'.

Do tell, what the hell does this have to do with the issue at hand?

Or can you not comprehend what this topic is about?

I'll remind you.

A level requirement to create a clan.

Maybe I'm just really stupid, but for some reason, what you said is absolutely irrelevant.  Why can't we as a community just create a productive discussion?  It's quixotic of me to hope for the best all the time, but really now, why can't we be civil? 

That aside, I still think it is important to at least reserve clan creation to people who have a better chance of staying.  That is, someone who has played for 5-10 hours is more likely to play than someone who ragequits the first match.  So why is it absurd to have a small benefit for sticking around, even just for a little bit?!

[Skymonger]

The amount of rage between veterans is something that could be taken in a bottle, blended up, put on ice, swallowed and then puked out while the content simultaneously dissolves your insides.

It's that bad.
I've lost all sense of what the main topic is, and I'm sitting here reading a spit fest between two players with some bad history between them that I could NOT CARE ABOUT.
And quite frankly I'm getting this upsetting vibe that all veterans are dicks in general for the sake of teaching a new player to "learn" and when you put two vets up against each other, the fricken world falls out beneath them.

But that's not really important.

From what I understand, there's a lot of small clans out there taking up "space" and taking up name tags while simultaneously being inactive.
And this is a problem because ACTIVE people want the tags names that the INACTIVES have.
Max's suggestion, was that we have a player reach a certain level threshold before they are able to actually make a clan, much like how you need to have a certain level before escaping novice and joining vet games.
Because his argument is that new players make a clan prematurely with their buddies and get bored of the game and abandon it leaving behind a hollowed husk of a clan name and tag when they leave.
Therefore, these new players should have this level restriction to make them play the game more in the hopes of keeping them in the game for that clan tag on the assumption that they will play more because they worked for that tag and clan.
At least, that's what I'm getting. Yet somewhere down the line, everything devolved into the angry scream fest right now, with "elitism" and "noobs refusing to listen"

It's understandable in a way.
But I honestly think it doesn't solve the problem that Max is getting at.
There are too many small clans taking up space and names that are inactive and need to be dissolved.
And there isn't a system in place to automatically dissolve them.

That needs to be looked at.
Have a system in which a minimum of three players have checked into the clan between a week or two. And if the clan doesn't have any of the players in its clan check in, then the clan is dissolved.
Surely a leader and a pair of officers is enough to show its activity.

Attempting to restrict the new players with friends getting together and forming a clan, I feel, is not the solution to this problem.
It MIGHT prevent more clans from being formed if they have a level restriction and making clan making a bit more important, but it WONT FIX the issue of there being too many small clans ALREADY THERE.

it might be something similar to an elitism mindset for suggesting restrictions on new players but that's something not worth mentioning on this problem.
Nor is the underlying issue of vets and noobs getting different treatments when they "vent" on the forum or in general.
Adding a level cap in clan making won't bridge the gap between newbies and veterans, That's a brand spanking new topic all together, one that isn't going to be solved by making it harder to make a clan, so let's drop that idea that it will alright?


Actually, how bout we drop the whole wrist slashing thing you guys got going on, cause honestly it's working on people just showing up to NOT GIVE A FLYING PICKLE?

[Richard LeMoon]

Basically, this is trying to solve a problem that does not exist, which is what has been talked about. All established players that want clans have clans. No reason to free up names there. Add in a level limit for clans so.... what, more people join other clans before they create their own so they don't need new names?

The solution to this 'problem' is still the same. Let four member crews form as many clans as they wish. Give them the default warning of "You must have 4 members in your clan or it will be deleted in 5 days AND you must have 4 members that log in once a month or its name will expire."

Simple, straight-forward, and it bothers no one. I have actually seen larger clans talk to and absorb entire smaller clans after seeing them do well. It actually helps larger clans see who is together and may be good for recruiting.



There is a history here, but it is not between him and I. I have had very small contact with him don't deal with him until he jumps on the forum and starts telling people how stupid their ideas are because of two dimensional thoughts, or harassing women in the game. The history is actually to do with his clan before AI had their own skin and levels showed up on characters. He created the clan to troll people, especially new players, with the philosophy of "Well if they are too stupid to figure it out, they deserve it."

So, most 'vets' are fine. That guy, however, seems to delight in making new players suffer as a way of 'teaching' them the game. If they leave? Oh well. They were not suited for this game anyways. This is just another facet of his hate for 'noobs'. It is not a suggestion made out of good intent, nor is it a suggestion to solve any valid 'problem'.

[Newbluud]

>or harassing women in the game

I agree with nearly every point you have to give about Ceresbane, but dude, women do not equate to minors.