ORG, TWC, and the Official Forum - what would the ORG specialize in?

Originally Posted by Maltz:
It would be nice if we combine the two into one (Profile picture = Avatar). People can choose to upload their own profile picture, or pick one from the existing choices that they like.

I would suggest restricting the image size to the same height as the existing portrait avatars, but allowing a bit more leeway horizontally. They're 50x74 - so 74x74 max might work. Width is not as critical as height, as profile details (HoF awards, location text, etc) still stretch the post bit horizontally. Just a suggestion.

:bow:

On topic, wiki's can generate a lot of traffic, and I believe that if the Org Wiki is improved and developed more people should start turning up.

For custom avatars, I have an idea of making them less of a visual hazard.

(1) Standard size. For example, it has to be 100 x 120 pixels, or whatever size the current avatars are having. The uploaded picture will be cropped (good) or stretched (not as good) to fit the standard size if they are not the right size.

AND

(2) Frames. All avatar pictures fit into a frame that is consistent with the ORG's theme. It might be possible to choose from a few pre-designed frames.

Not sure whether it is difficult to do technically.

I check this forum for EB , apart from that it seems pretty dead, maybe you could focus on EB ?

My two cents

Tavern is where most of the activity is, maybe focus on that...? There doesn't seem to have been any posts in the EB forum today?

Modding and offtopic always generates more "chatter", but not necessarily more content. Modding forums in particular have lots of testing, debugging and the thrashing out and submitting of ideas going on, posting of code and screens, etc. You can easily have a twenty+ page thread between two or three people. That's not to say a modding related thread is worth less (quite the opposite if you ask me), just that it inherently generates more chatter.

Personally I don't think the .org needs to focus on anything except Total War - everything else is a by product of that and will happen anyway.

The greatest contribution anyone can give to the Org is simply to post. The more people post, the more it encourages others to post. The less people post, the less incentive there is for others to post. Staff alone cannot sustain all the conversation, the members themselves need to help out. If anyone seriously wants to help the Org improve, you can easily do it by making an effort to write a post or two every day in a TW forum. With enough people posting over a long enough period of time, the forums will start to get more active.

Originally Posted by rajpoot:
On topic, wiki's can generate a lot of traffic, and I believe that if the Org Wiki is improved and developed more people should start turning up.

That's a good suggestion.

Any chance you want to help us with that?

Originally Posted by Peasant Phill:
That's a good suggestion.

Any chance you want to help us with that?

I really would like to, (since as such I'm a regular contributer at other gaming wikis) but the last TW game I played was M2TW-Kingdoms, and it's been over three years since I touched it.

Originally Posted by Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout:
The People here aren't nice!

Yes they are. I play mafia games here, and my style is pretty eccentric, and when I went over to another forum to play it, I was insulted and mocked by the community for the way I posted/played. Granted I was a bit abrasive, but I do not experience any of the hate I got over there here.

Originally Posted by rajpoot:
I really would like to, (since as such I'm a regular contributer at other gaming wikis) but the last TW game I played was M2TW-Kingdoms, and it's been over three years since I touched it.

I and probably many of the Throne Roomers could help you out with the wiki. What needs doing?

Originally Posted by Maltz:
I can't locate the "rate thread" tool, so I guess senior member is a non-staff. (sob)
There are four links on my top right:
View First Unread, Thread Tools, Search Thread, Display.

I've been discussing this with our techies. Currently the built-in rating tool is limited to staff only, meaning content staff, moderators, and admins. We've been using it to mark threads which contain posts by CA staff members. We rate them with a modified 1 star rating and bingo, a little CA shield appears next to the topic name on the board listing. That's turned out to be an unexpected source of difficulty. If we open the system up in its current form, everyone will be able to rate topics as containing CA posts. Not good. If we turn off the CA rating and revert to the original 5 star series, we'll lose the ability to mark CA posts and we'll also end up with all existing CA posts marked as "Terrible!". Also not good! Locating and re-rating all of the threads would be ... problematic.

So currently we are looking at vbulletin hacks to see if there's a suitable one to introduce. That way we will be able to run two ratings systems side by side, one for the public and one for staff.

Originally Posted by :
I would recommend that the "Thank" icon be increased so people can be thankful more frequently. :laugh4:

That one is unlikely to happen. If we made the icon bigger it wouldn't fit with the rest of the icons at the bottom of a post. We did try a few different 'thanks' mods and this was the one which received the most positive feedback amongst staff and patrons. It was felt that some of the other systems were too busy. If I had my way, the button would be in flashing lights with a sign saying, "Thank people who create useful content PLEASE! Give a little back in recognition of the time they spent!" :laugh4:

I do think it would be nice if the forum notified you when one of your posts gets thanked. Well, notified more clearly - there's a tiny category on your profile which counts thanks. The current hack doesn't allow for that.

Originally Posted by Visorslash:
I and probably many of the Throne Roomers could help you out with the wiki. What needs doing?

TBH I don't know where to begin. We can do what the TWC wiki has done, like simply pick stuff from the game and add it to the wiki. But that would just be redundant, and I always felt that the Org had more intellectuals than TWC, so maybe along with standard information about various aspects of the game Org wiki can focus on the real historical information too....?
:2cents:

There is a ton of useful info on the games in the various guides sections (always one of the Org's selling points). That information could be put into the wiki to give it original content that isn't so generic.

How about changing Thanks to red or something more obvious and perhaps a passionate icon? Or move it to the right so people notice it it while clicking reply.

Another way to encourage people to give thanks is to have a "thanks received" and "thanks given" counter for each member. This way we are all "encouraged" to give thanks in order not to appear ungrateful and anti-social. :rolleyes:

Did someone say "wiki"? Always looking for fresh bodies to throw at that! ~D

Just a little opinion on wiki:
Wiki would be awesome when it contains information that people constantly look for. I have lost count of the times when I google unit names and get linked to that .ru site.

I use the Org's MTW wiki constantly to reference stats and game options. My memory is not what it once was.

Originally Posted by rajpoot:
TBH I don't know where to begin. We can do what the TWC wiki has done, like simply pick stuff from the game and add it to the wiki. But that would just be redundant, and I always felt that the Org had more intellectuals than TWC, so maybe along with standard information about various aspects of the game Org wiki can focus on the real historical information too....?
:2cents:

That's a great idea but a gigantic amount of work. You can't just ad one paragraph of historical info and be done with it.
The idea of a wiki+ (patent on the name pending), however, is a good idea. Some links and recommended books on particulr subjects may already go a long way. Still a huge amount of work.

Originally Posted by TinCow:
There is a ton of useful info on the games in the various guides sections (always one of the Org's selling points). That information could be put into the wiki to give it original content that isn't so generic.

That's a fantastic idea. Most wikis of other games are used as an index for guides. Or wiki could work the same way.
It may also inspire people to write guides themselves.

IS the wiki about the TW games, or does it have other parts to it?

Originally Posted by Peasant Phill:
That's a great idea but a gigantic amount of work. You can't just ad one paragraph of historical info and be done with it.
The idea of a wiki+ (patent on the name pending), however, is a good idea. Some links and recommended books on particulr subjects may already go a long way. Still a huge amount of work.

I agree it will be a lot of work, but the way I see it, most of what has to be put in is already available, ready-made. The unit information, faction information from the game can be just copied from TWC wiki and the strategy guides. What will take work will be adding the historical information.
What I had in mind was something like what they have at World of tanks wiki.
Check out these pages.
http://wiki.worldoftanks.com/T110E5
http://wiki.worldoftanks.com/BDR_G1B
Varied amount of historical information, added as available. Now this is just one idea off the top of my head......

Out of curiosity, when people say that traffic has reduced here, what exactly has it reduced to and what has it reduced from? I mean gaming forums normally do have a lull in activity between titles.

Most of the pages are TW-game specific, but there are a few pages on Mafia and other forum games. Every member also has a user home page they can put stuff in or try things out on.

When Shogun2 came out, some of us started putting together pages for it, as well as Med2, so there are a lot of pages created and categorized, they just need to be fleshed out and updated to the latest expansion. I'm not going to sugar-coat it, it's a lot of work since there are so many different units, tech paths, etc. to fill in and comment on.

If there are any EBers interested, a reference/guide wiki for EB would be awesome. :yes:

The org is in desperate need of members and the greatest source for such are the new TW games. The org is based around what TW was 8-10 years ago and it catered to people that played the then TW games - this is all water under the bridge; TW games are much different in their orientation and so is their clientelle. Org's rules and tradition are to me its greatest attraction but, that's very bad news for the forum overall. That my own humble modding effort for MTW was voted mod of the year here is embarassing to say the least. As was the voting participation for the new game.

Just-get-the-new-people-in. You don't need only veteran minded people that are more mature here. Froggy guides won't get you new people in. You need the younger lads and ladies that play newer TW as well and that may mean dropping 'quality standards' where those are to be lowered. Mature discussions are well and good, but they won't fill in the numbers - and without people that play the games there isn't anything to discuss, nor potential new migrators at other areas of the forum.

The problem is that the org had isolated itself for many years in order to preserve its character, to the point that new influx became so little that in the end its us and us. Unless one is from the 'old' generation its quite difficult to get the place's spirit and get into it - you'll get thrown at a corner or busted. A turning point is fast approaching and this year's awards prove that beyond any shadow of a doubt. More discussion about whether the forum should open up in case the regulars get upset will only bring the inevitable faster. As for becoming TWC copycats, its too late to worry about that - the org has already copied TWC policies/means and devices.

Just get moving on - there is less and less time every year.

​
Firstly a friendly slap (36 here ~;)) and congratulations to Maltz. :bow: Then...

I think the Org is a habit; a place of return in the wide oceans of the WWW (and thereout as well). It's a community. It's about friendships, memories, debates, respect and all that. Well, to me it is! Honestly, I threw away Shogun 2 after playing the tutorial for a few hours on the enthusiastic praise of Left Eye Nine, which I couldn't cross... The only TW game I occasionally go back to is EB and the last time I launched it was about 8 months ago... TotalWar series is no more for me but the ORG isn't just about TotalWar.

My 2 pennies...
​

Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre:
I think the Org is a habit; a place of return in the wide oceans of the WWW (and thereout as well). It's a community. It's about friendships, memories, debates, respect and all that. Well, to me it is! Honestly, I threw away Shogun 2 after playing the tutorial for a few hours on the enthusiastic praise of Left Eye Nine, which I couldn't cross... The only TW game I occasionally go back to is EB and the last time I launched it was about 8 months ago... TotalWar series is no more for me but the ORG isn't just about TotalWar.

That's exactly what i'm talking about.. for me its more or less the same. You don't need people like us. You need people that think the newest TW game is the best thing after sliced bread. Its them you should be targeting, not us.

Interesting thread… In more ways then one… Anyways....

Originally Posted by TinCow:
The greatest contribution anyone can give to the Org is simply to post. The more people post, the more it encourages others to post. The less people post, the less incentive there is for others to post.

Your assessment does have some merit - to a degree. The problem is that this view it is too simplistic and limited. It is not a matter of just posting, it also a matter of what we are posting as well. That “what” is more important then the actual post as such. If it were not so, we could all start spamming right now and everything would be just hunky-dory here… And even if some people here are very able spammers at times - the reality is that it is nowhere enough to create any circumstances that would somehow answer or solve the real questions here. In short it just fails to truly address the actual questions of this thread. Namely…“Why should I come here?”, “Why should I post?”, “What makes it worthwhile and attractive to do both - here?” All these questions are warranted to ask and the very reason this thread exist’s in the first place – as I understand it….

Originally Posted by TinCow:
Staff alone cannot sustain all the conversation, the members themselves need to help out.

This is true, but yet again only to a limited degree… Now, in order for that to happen somehow - the people responsible of this site - must also be able to offer some sort of reason or motivation as for why the members should do so in the first place…. As long as that aspect is not truly resolved you will never have a real change of current circumstances - this regardless what anybody do or promise here.

Originally Posted by TinCow:
If anyone seriously wants to help the Org improve, you can easily do it by making an effort to write a post or two every day in a TW forum.

This is also true, to a degree… Again it is too limited… Again it fails to truly and properly address the questions raised in post:1. “Why should I come here?”, “Why should I post?” “What makes it worthwhile and attractive to do both - here?” And this even if all people were to actually do the stuff outlined - the questions would still be essentially unanswered all the same.


Now, I agree with you, TinCow, upon that this place/site should indeed stick to the "TW-framwork" and I do believe there is a future for that somehow. However that framework needs to be defined - openly, properly and clearly - and once that is done - acted upon accordingly.

As for the rest above, I essentially interpret that stuff - rightly or wrongly - as some sort of argument pro "status quo" which is the last thing I want here. In the event that I am right about that, I can only say... Unless you guys (read ORG-brass) are not seriously willing to listen and honestly re-examine your current doctrines – the very doctrines that obviously have heavily influenced and shaped the supposedly unwanted realities that this board has today - then all this is basically pointless. If so, I fail to see why we should even bother to discuss this at all?

I mean, I (and possibly others) may very well have some few ideas and suggestions that could set this site apart from the rest, however all that is meaningless unless you guys don't really want things to change here, right? So, my question to ORG-brass is - are you serious in this discussion or not? Or is it just for show? Because discussing colors of thanks-buttons, avatars etc. etc. does not set this place apart, it does not truly attempt to address the actual questions essentially raised in post 1... “Why should I come here?”, “Why should I post?” “What makes it worthwhile and attractive to do both - here?”

So, I wonder... Are you - the ORG-brass - willing to actually listen here and prepared to change current doctrines, for real? Y/N?

(BTW, I am saying this nicely)


- A

Originally Posted by Visorslash:
I actually moved from TWC to the Org. :laugh4:

I like it here, it may not be as active, but the people are nicer and the debates are nice to watch, as well as the TR and GR.

me too i moved here from the twc

to the .org because they have permantly exhiled me although i kinda deserved it now that i had a few chances to look over my past posts there

The Org is weak in such a way that it needs some expanding.

Originally Posted by Axalon:
So, I wonder... Are you - the ORG-brass - willing to actually listen here and prepared to change current doctrines, for real? Y/N?

Absolutely. I'm not sure if people have really noticed, but the Org has changed more in the past year than it did in the previous five years. We want to keep this place alive, so if you've got actual plans that can be implemented we are eager to hear them.

Originally Posted by :
So, I wonder... Are you - the ORG-brass - willing to actually listen here and prepared to change current doctrines, for real? Y/N?

Slightly unfair question. It assumes that the volunteers at the Org have twaddled their thumbs, refusing to do anything to make the experience better, when things are constantly being looked at and changes are being made, most notably, the Org "brass" itself.

There are some fantastic support facilities currently deployed and are being deployed for Mod creators, Vidya-Crowd, and other content creation aspects of the TW series which look quite exciting. There have been big shifts in policies, especially with a major staff change-over which has brought differences. When I first joined, the Backroom was a place where you had to be vetted and approved, there was even a "junior member" rank where you wasn't even allowed to edit your own posts and had to demonstrate yourself. Now, there are no such ranks, people can freely come here and freely contribute, the Org is a far less rigid and far more fluid.

Admittedly, some changes haven't moved as fast as I have liked them in some aspects, then there are other changes which people have proposed which I personally disagreed with. But to answer your question more directly, if you want to feel listened to on the Org, then this is currently the best time in it's history to make those valuable contributions and be heard.

Originally Posted by Maltz:
Another way to encourage people to give thanks is to have a "thanks received" and "thanks given" counter for each member. This way we are all "encouraged" to give thanks in order not to appear ungrateful and anti-social. :rolleyes:

That is a bad concept and the "Give Thanks" system was deliberately implemented with such a function turned off. The volunteers who help manage the Org do post on other forums and do have experiences with their operations. All of them stated when they idea came up that they didn't want a counter visible.

Why?
Because this is not a popularity contest and no one wanted such a function which facilitated that aspect. These usually breed resentment or "gamey tactics" to artificially inflate (and on some forums, deflate) scores of users which makes the whole practical implementation feel tacky and meaningless.

However, people do like recognition for their work, and sometimes people read a post or topic and go "I think that post is rather good." but they don't want to feel they are spamming up the thread with their reply. In return, people who made such post might feel that no one appreciated it.

Conclusion:
We decided to do as a halfway system. Allow people to "Give Thanks" to a contribution without intruding and allow that other user to feel appreciated for their contribution. There is no real "gain" or "point scoring" involved, it is simply warm felt gratitude and appreciation.

Originally Posted by TinCow:
Absolutely. I'm not sure if people have really noticed, but the Org has changed more in the past year than it did in the previous five years. We want to keep this place alive, so if you've got actual plans that can be implemented we are eager to hear them.

Definitely agreed here. Lots of changes have been implemented by TinCow and the group. :yes: