Search results for query: *

Yes I know, but it operates under the same principle, which is what I’m objecting to Anyway, we’re likely not talking about the same thing, so seems fruitless to continue

We haven’t I don’t think this stacks up logically whatsoever, or makes the point you think you’re making People don’t have fun losing games either, ranked games have losers, ergo ranked games aren’t fun for everyone. It’s chimp logic, indicative of nothing

I quoted the part about ranked setups being ‘not fun’ The reason this doesn’t make sense is twofold: - if you’re playing a ranked game, unless you signed up at gun point, you know that it’s likely going to adhere to some form of quality control - to then specifically not enjoy that because of that fact is a contradiction in terms - ranked games don’t have to be uniform. For reference, see my darkest dungeon game. If someone else wants to attempt something similar I’m 100% all for it, but unless they are supremely confident it all adds up and works, then they should get a 2nd pair of eyes on it, just as a courtesy to the people who are going to play

What does that have to do with what we’re talking about?

Literally the post I quoted, in its entirety

Because your point doesn’t make sense

You’ve lost me

It depends what kind of growth you mean If it’s folk hopping from forum to forum to follow someone, let’s say you just for examples sake, on a tour of hosting SRM games on various platforms, then that isn’t really growth. Controversial as it may sound, what I would ideally want would be a kind of brand loyalty - the staff (and I don’t include myself in that) are committed to making the site as good as possible which is more than can be said for 90% of boards I’ve frequented, and the site features are great also. If we have a focus on quality games (which ranked does, although sometimes the mark gets missed) then we can build on that. If on the other hand we’re pumping out garbage for the sake of appeasing an at best niche audience, then it’s not going to happen. I’d challenge anyone who wants to defend the status quo of the unranked section, since it was conceived, to tell me who or what its supposed to appeal to? My rough plan is to instead relax some of the stringency around...

I mean, you just made my argument for me lol

And have you not stopped to wonder why your section gained no traction, and why anybody who put in any semblance of effort into this feels they probably wasted their time? You can look at that through the prism of ‘well it was unranked so caveat emptor’ or we can try aim a bit higher collectively

We don’t promote unbalanced and/or bastard games - nor should we

There’s a few things that were considering - we want this to be as good a place as possible that people want to play at, and some changes for both ranked and unranked are in the pipeline to hopefully reflect that

i think putting egregiously unbalanced games on offer will just kill the average players interest in ever playing (here) again. There’s a balance to be struck and a standard to be met, and I doubt anyone thinks, with the greatest will in the world, that’s what transpired here

I haven’t paid any attention to this game, but the reports filtering through will likely lead to some changes for what this section is designed to do