No.Quote:
Originally Posted by pitchfork
When you play HD normally, obviously your game "it is about me playing my game, not my leader", but when you play a derby, is the group that wins or loses and your bad game could lose the whole group.
Printable View
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by pitchfork
When you play HD normally, obviously your game "it is about me playing my game, not my leader", but when you play a derby, is the group that wins or loses and your bad game could lose the whole group.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KawaM
No, this is not relevant. Yes, playing as a team is working together and my game could affect yours, but that is voluntary -- I choose to play, I choose to be in a hood, I choose to agree with rules of hood, etc etc. My choice. Not the leader's choice. If the hood or leader doesn't want me messing up their game they have a KICK button. Use it. I would rather go it alone than have to beg my hood to let me join in. And I would not be interested in controlling anyone else's choice. If they didn't want to play my rules and I was the leader, I'd rather kick them out than spend each week evaluating whether to let them play the Derby or not.
It amazes me all the threads that I read about leaders wanting to have more power over the farms in their NH.
I thought the derby was supposed to be a fun game-inside the- game add. Not a venue for power crazed overlords to control and have button pressing ability over each person in their neighborhood!
If you have someone who isn't participating, and not opting out - reach out to them. They're human being after all (I hope); and if you can't and it's impacting your ability to get 1st place in the derby (perish the thought) - boot them.
Shocked by the amount of involvement and manipulating some leaders want to have in how the derby is run. It is just a game after all... or did I miss something?
I'm weighing in with the logical position of have the default status be Opted Out/Not in Derby.
We have lost one member because he'd been idle the week before, we had not contact with him, kicked him so's not to disadvantage us at derby the next week... but he never logged into the game with GC or Fb so that we could invite him back.
Worse, we've had members who intend to do derby, but then suddenly life happens in the real world, and then don't have time to go opt out.... so they end up being dead weight to carry for that race. Had this happen to two members this week, grrrr. 7th freaking place because of it :mad:
If the default were to be opted out of derby, then only those active enough to seriously want to participate in derby would be In Derby for the race. Someone forgets to opt it, bummer... but no where near as much of a bummer as pulling the whole freaking hood down with them because they forgot or didn't have time to opt out.
That's just a bad idea. Not gonna happen anyways, so why keep going on about it. :smirk:
The only logical solution is to have the default status be Not in Derby, and players have to opt in to derby each week.
Agree with this 100%. Not sure how hard it can be to make the status opt out if someone doesn't complete a task in the prior derby. They can then opt in when they get back to the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by pitchfork
Because we are not able to do this we have to kick them out and let them rejoin once derby starts. It is a hassle that could be avoided.
Similar thread: Automatic Opt Out of DerbyQuote:
Originally Posted by beefcake2015
It would cause more grief to be kicked out of a neighbourhood than to be excluded from derby. Criteria could be set that must be met for leaders to opt someone out such as minimum requirements not being met in number of derby points and\or number of tasks per derby.
Currently we have a forced derbylessness policy which requires us to kick someone out and allow them to rejoin after derby begins. Miscommunication and grief can occur this way.
Derbies have changed the way neighbourhoods function. Neighbourhoods that were like families with members that had been together for a long time have broken apart due to the competition. Some lower level players have a hard time completing required tasks. If leaders could opt them out it would enable them to still be part of a neighbourhood without the grief of being kicked out.
Leaders can kick people out of neighbourhoods so why shouldn't they be able to opt members out of derbies. Other members complain when someone is not doing their share of tasks. As a leader I would rather opt someone out of a derby than kick them out of the neighborhood.