Having a structured system in place would encourage the implementation of new clans, get more people interested in them, and give them validation.

It would also get rid of the possibility of people "pretending" to be in a clan as you say, but that's not one of the main reasons for this, only the reason I proposed the colored tags in front of people's names instead of just white.

You say that it wouldn't add any functionality, but it could give stats about the clan, rosters, history of clan matches, and other functional additions to the game that are based around the interaction of different clans with each other.

Yes it's always easy to find fun games, but in my experience it's more fun when playing with people you can identify with, especially because it's someone you know you can trust and communicate with easily.

It would give a more competitive edge to some games while not detracting from those who choose not to use the system. The competitive games is not a point to make huge games but more to have them identified as official clan matches between specific clans and have a record of those games.

"while not detracting from those who choose not to use the system."

That is debatable. More clans means more members meaning higher chance of unfair or unbalanced FFAs. A few members of clans which are 'allies' in an FFA could greatly impact the outcome of the game adversely for non-members. I grant you that this can already happen but making such a formal structure would only exacerbate the situation.

I think having a formal-clan system with rankings and stats would be a nice addition. In my opinion it'd strengthen the community and make Warlight a better place overall.

Having open-seat prerequisities just for certain clans to facilitate the formal system with clan matches would be fun too.

Saying this, I have no interest in shoving any tag infront of my name, and would avoid joining a clan if it was forced upon me, either by it's rules or the game-system itself.

First, uservoice does not make this a Democracy, it's just to give Fizzer a general idea of some functions that users support. I also don't mean to speak for him, that wasn't my intention. I was simply using reason to determine my assumption of his intentions. Take a look at the 13 above this:

- peace treaties- a huge gameplay change that was suggested and added well over a year ago, that seemingly has gotten no support from Fizzer, and has not been implemented or accepted

- Able to see who's online- Useless compared to the Global PM option just below it on the list

- Global PM- a great idea IMHO, but still has been proposed over and over and still never even hinted at implementation

- Allow teams to receive armies when the team collectively controls a bonus- a huge gameplay change just like the top idea, making it hard to implement and IMHO doesn't make a lot of sense in my opinion becuase it defeats the point of having seperate amounts of troops per turn from your team mates.

- Anonymous Games- a cool idea, but kinda silly as there are always ways to find out whom it is you're playing against and would also be hard to implement

- Android client- already accepted and being worked on, so useless at this point

- Achievements- kinda already done with the whole "Single Player" games showing up on your page and your profile showing your stats....not sure what other Achievements would be necessary or usefull

- Highligh non-standard game settings- not sure why this is even still there seeing as it's already been implemented....

- iPhone client- Ditto Android

- Identify players by their country with a flag next to their name- kinda cool, and easy to do for the most point, but wouldn't add much to the game, no new functionality at least, and some players don't want to identify where they're from to the rest of the gamers

- Ability to make and save notes on player.- seems like a mess to implement, and would take a lot of space, and not really useful in-game either. If you like someone add them to your invite list, if you dislike them black-list them. If you don't know who someone is by seeing their name, you probably don't care enough to write a paragraph about them instead of playing the game.

- Add a "friends list" subset to the invite list- also kinda silly, but easy to implement, and not really that useful. if you're friends....you should know how to find them anyway.


I don't see anything there that's really better than the clan system, adds more functionality, or is more worth Fizzer's time. And many of those have been around for a long time without any indication that Fizzer supports them or will implement them at any time.

-

and as to the unfairness of clan-members being in FFAs, this has been discussed before.

1- don't join those games then
2- I don't speak for others, but REGL members would rather have bragging rights for beating each other than teaming up unfairly
3- have you ever had clan-members gang up against you?
4- I think there's a better chance of two friends without a tag identifying them as such teaming up against you (especially with PMs) than clan-members who you know are together doing the same

@Franco: that could be an option, some clans could choose to not have a tag, only display tags in clan-matches, or give users the option to hide theirs. I kinda like that idea as it gives more customization without much work on Fizzer's part and more member-freedom.

Here's the thing though...

YOU don't see anything there that's better than clans. But the majority of WL users who want their voices heard obviously do see those items as more important. If they didn't, the clans/leagues topic would clearly have far more votes.

Also, while it may not be a democracy, why institute a system such as UV only to completely ignore the results? Doesn't make much sense, does it?

(I am also amused that you speak of the other topics being up there for a long time while ignoring the fact that the league topic has been up for just as long but has far less support)

one suggestion eagle, how about creating the clan infrastructure outside of warlight?

console based clans (like xbox/playstation) go through MLG (major league gaming). It actually worked out quite well when i was in call of duty/rainbow six clans.

now im not saying you should use an particular existing system, but rather someone could create a website for this. Fizzer has enough on his plate, and im sure you can find someone who is in a warlight clan who can make a website.

and i know someone is going to mention: "but...uh uh....how are they going to operate together?" the simple answer is that they don't have to operate together. Anyone can put a clan tag in front of their name, but only actual clan members will be registered on this (hypothetical) clan website. (the clan leader being the one controlling the team members)

this actually could replace the idea of the 3v3 euro ladder. I mean that if this system were in place, everyone could just create clans and compete against each other on a 3v3 euro league supported by this website. Instead of whatever system the ladders have, it would be literal team records (wins and loses) and then playoffs whenever the leagues end (ultimate bragging rights).





...this of course would take a lot of time to create and maintain by someone, and fizzer would have to put the green light on it.

the only reason i posted ^ is because Fizzer clearly has other things to focus on (as you two have clearly debated about) and this would be an alternative

@mablung: I have made a free site for REGL that has such a list of official members and discussion of clan-matches and such. The problem is, it's limited and sloppy at best. To make it better, you'd have to make an actual paid-site, for which I don't have the money to support. I'm adept at site creation and maintenance, but am also in College and don't have the time to deal with it. If it was inbedded in the WL site it would be much easier, cost no money, and need almost 0 maintenance once it's implemented.

@Sharpe: What I'm saying is that I think it's more important than any of those 13 that havn't already been implemented. I'm also saying (not just an opinion) that it adds more functionality than many of them, and is easier to implement than most of them as it wouldn't take much coding, mostly site-design which is easier and less time consuming than changing the in-game functionality of the game.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful of anyone else's ideas, just giving my genuine opinion, you're also entitled to your own. If you don't like my proposed clan system, that's fine, but give a good reason instead of just hating because it's something you don't plan on using.

I did give a reason... for one, I don't trust the clans impact on non-members for FFA's and other multiplayer games. I'm sure plenty of you would be honorable and not let the clan affiliations interfere but there are enough that wouldn't so as to pose a problem and impact game outcomes and enjoyment.

And I haven't been 'hating' because it's something I don't plan to use... I have been 'hating' because I think the other higher-voted topics merit attention before this. Had you been advocating the 18th ranked option I would say that the leagues UV merited attention first due to its higher vote total. I would have this stance even if you were advocating something I had voted for on UV.

Richard: The topic is to discuss this idea. Whether there are other idea's you think more people want is irrelevant. Lets discuss this idea for it's merits and drawbacks and leave everything else to Fizzer.

So, other than clans impacting FFA matches (which can already happen, regardless of the system) what other drawbacks are there to having this system?

What it comes down to though, is that UV is not absolute. Fizzer has implemented low-vote options because he doesn't like them, added hundreds of functions that were never on uservoice, and ignored many in the top ranks of the UV list. I believe (not 100% but I remember this from somewhere) that Fizzer has said in the past that he doesn't want the game to just become a "user-controlled" setup, because it's a recipe for failure. That's why he calls UV "Feedback" and not "vote for what will be implemented"

in other words, UV is meant to be proposals from players, not a system for players to implement what they want. He listens to feedback but in the end it's his game not ours. I'm not telling him to implement clans, just giving my opinion and looking for some feedback from the community on my more specific ideas for the clan setup.

@Richard: The FFA impact would wind up being lessened if you could identify the clans doing it by not joining games with them, which is a lot easier than trying to identify individuals doing it, so I fail to see why you are so opposed to the clan system.

And if the clan members join en masse (or individually) after I have joined the game? What option do I have then?

There is also the impact on tournaments. I, for one, am not big on tournaments but they are certainly popular. Now consider that individuals may act differently in a tournament setting to ensure that one of their clan is the winner of any game and thus ensures the clan's success. Thus the best player doesn't win but the most popular one does.

And yes, these issues can already arise. However, an increase in clans and members makes these issues more prominent.


Add in the fact that any game I have played in the past with a strong clan/league presence have usually become less enjoyable due to them. My interest in those games wane in large part due to the clan wars and inevitable bragging and complaints that come along with them. While I may not be the standard, I am sure there are plenty others like me in this respect.

Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but IMHO, games with clan-members are not much different than ones without. On top of that, REGL isn't a very competitive clan, more casual unless it comes to clan-matches. in tournaments, most clans try to play together on teams anyway. Most tournaments are usually 1v1 or XvX anyway, so you can't really help anyone but yourself win...unless it's a game between two clan-only teams, in which case one will win regardless. In the case of REGL at least, as I've said, we'd rather beat each other than strangers.

I've actually found that in FFAs with clan members I tend to team up with someone else from the game to attack my clan-mate becuase it's more fun.

Yo Rich!

If you're so against clans why'd you join this game?

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=1965320

Interesting

Again, just because you are honorable in handling it doesn't mean that all will be. I think everyone has seen deceptive or underhanded practices on here so why would those be limited to outside the clans?

Another issue is that having such a forum would negate the FFAs where PMs have been turned off. Clan members will be given an unfair advantage in any non-PM FFA due to this.

sry, wrong game ^ please disregard that comment

I joined that game? That's news to me...