Hello all,
I hope you have all had the chance to read the newest portion of the plot. Some points that each of you should probably know:
There are two of me.
Each Jac believes he is the legitimate ruler of the Dark Brotherhood
The Dark Council members, depending on which Jac they were with, were convinced that the other was an impostor. That is why Muz and Anshar, for example, moved to attack Blue Jac. The others defended, thinking Red Jac was the impostor, and a fight ensued.
The Dark Council is currently split between the Jacs, each vying for control and working to gain people to their cause.
When you log into the administration menu now, under the GJW heading you will see a link to the script that allows you to change your allegiance. You may choose red or blue, and may change this once per day. The rosters show the members' allegiance by color.
Matches in this series of events may only be played against members of the opposite allegiance. Choose a side before you MP.
RoCs apply all around, but for a few deviations as described in the rules on match lengths and scoring. Play nice.
Event descriptions are up on the GJW site.
USE THE REGULAR GJW SUBMISSION FORM TO SUBMIT MATCHES. You do not need to log this one. Just submit match by match.
Let us know if you have any querstions.
Jac
You need to be logged in to post comments
What if one would rather not choose a side? Why are we assuming everyone would pick a side in this fight?
Well, it was a little more complicated in the initial planning, where people would change allegiance when getting "convinced" (aka beaten) by another person to join that allegiance.
However, that was too complicated for what we were hearing people wanted, so we simplified it.
If people don't want to choose sides, they don't have to, but the points only go to those who do.
Short answer: many teams = complicated when we are being asked for a simpler GJW. 2 teams = straight forward.
Jac
....
Go Red!!
.....
o.O
Why not simply allow unaligned people to continue to play for points, and give a couple of days or so for people to make their choice? Even fictionally, people wouldn't choose sides right away. That also allows for people who have chosen to play unaligned people; otherwise, people shouldn't be able to play unaligned people for points at all. MPing would have to be limited to those who have already chosen (jumping into the conflict, as it were).
Not necessarily many teams. Now I could be wrong in my interpretation of the fiction but it seems to be implied anyway that those engaged in the War will attempt to convince others that their way is the proper way.
"You are on Karufr, home of Taldryan." Rax, said, almost urgently. "Our lord is the true Dark Lord of the Sith. We must convince the others by force if necessary"
Why is it to be assumed that they would only attack other follower of Jac and would not also attack those that have chosen no side? Not choosing a side should be a valid choice members from either Red or Blue would be allowed to attack them in an attempt to convince the if you will. It would not overly complicate matters because you would only be increasing the total number of teams by one.
By instituting a new team that would compose the general category of neutrality, we would gain the ability for members characters to be true to the character while also allowing them to take part. Not to mention assuming that all the Clans would choose to support a Jac and his DC followers. It is possible some may decide to allow the two sides to weaken themselves so they can exploit the weakness. This is a valid fictional standpoint for Dark Jedi. It also opens up new avenues of fiction between Clans. This example is just that an example and should not be read into.
If for example Tal as a Clan chooses to support Blue Jac and CSP chooses Red Jac they will do battle to prove who is correct. But it would also allow say CP to declare neutrality and both Tal and CSP could engage CP adding a new level of fictional interaction. Then if you will Tar is required by Alliance to aide in CP and possibly CNS. What we gain is greatly adding to the fictional relationships between the Clans while minimally increasing the complexity of the event. Red can attack Blue and Gray, Blue can attack Red and Gray, and Gray can attack Red or Blue.
I fail to see the difficulty in increasing the number of teams by a total of one, other then accepting that it was an avenue that was not fully explored previously.
As much as I find teams in this case idiotic, as it limits your options to do anything in whats supposed to be the biggest competion of the year for the DB, but even worse I think....
5 points for a win, 1 for a loss?
That's insane, people who know they can't win won't play at all, and the people who know they will win will call it match dodging and get points for it anyways, or get the others in trouble.
Lame.
not lame, interesting
I think its awesome :D
Blue Jac FTW!
I have to agree, 5:1 scoring ratio is too much. You've done nothing but caus players who know they can't win to...not participate...making the GJW once again...less fun.
Any player who dosen't know they have a damn good chance of winning simply won't participate, if they value thier clan at all. It used to be that losing was still enough points to make the participation worthwhile, but now we're just fueling the people that are beating us.
"Good Job NOV SucksAtBF, you just got us 15 points in the war...unfortunately, you gave RandomClan 75 points! Thanks for playing and losing us the war"
Granted, thats kinda mean, but..its kinda true.
Im curious what the reasoning behind making this such a high stakes game...as only the best competitors will play now. If we were matching skill levels, it would be more then adequete..but when RandomPWNer can challenge randomn00bs 1-50 and get 250 points, and if the random n00b says 'no, id rather play another n00b' he gets demoted, loses his GJW medals, and other harsh punishments because he wasen't very sportsmanlike.
In this instance, I'd say the event organizers should instead be demoted. This just came across my clan mailing list...
Lucius had about 90 - 10 win loss, Xayun had 50- 4 win loss and I had a 160 - 17 win loss record for gaming in the last event...
if that helps :)
(though I do have less time because of work, but I can still manage
to get a shitload of wins :) )
Leave gaming to me, Lucius, Xayun and Manesh ;)
Ylith
Thank you DC/CONs for your wonderful oversight. For the duration of the GJW, the average player now has no reason to participate. I nominate someone with the authority to award medals run a competition for 'suckier' players, where you can only participate if you're not pwning the GJW gaming events.
Thorin,
Three other people politely asked me to fix the scoring for losses. I had already made up my mind in favor of doing so before I read your post. Why? Because they asked nicely.
You don't have to be a jerk all of the time. Your sarcasm could have been toned down maybe ten notches and it would be a much more useful comment.
Jac
Spears, BF:
I'm addressing your comments with the DC/CONs tomorrow.
I wasn't trying to say in my comment that we can't do what you say, that we won't, or even that I haven't thought of it -- I was just trying to say that we were trying to play by the KISS rules and keep it simple.
If people want us to introduce more complexities, I'm ok with that. We'll see what the Consuls have to say.
I'd suggest letting Welsh know fully what you would like to see and have him bring it up.
Thanks
Jac
Actually, I brought my comment here for a couple of reasons.
1) People check these comments sections on "hot" topics regularly, and it had more of a chance to be seen, thought over, added to, argued against, etc. by the members.
2) I knew you (Jac) check these, too, and would see it, and probably bring it up.
3) I had the thought while I was reading comments already here, and I wanted to put it in a place where I'd be able to remember it. Yes, I use the comments section as a note pad sometimes. :P
Oh I wasn't chiding you for that. I don't care how I get the feedback, as long as I get it. The comment system is just as good.
I was just posting to inform you that I'll be taking what you said and discussing it with the people in charge of making the change happen.
Comment system is fine.
Jac
huh? how did my e-mail strand up here?
weird...
Can we have other choices, like...
Purple = rooting for both GMs
Yellow = want the GMs to kill each other off so they can take over the DJB
Green = backers of robo-Jac, the next version!
Orange = who cares about the GMs so long as I have my ice cream!
Brown/Yellow = so freaked out by the appearance of two GMs that...um, yeah :D
I have to go with the Orange team with those choices.