URPG Clan System Questionnaire

Hey guys, I'm trying to spearhead this project which you may have heard me mention a few times - the URPG Clan System. This is designed to be a long term tournament which rewards activity and success across all sections of the URPG. This post I made in Staff sums it up nicely:

Spoiler

Following on from this post, I'd like to do a more formal proposal for what I would call the faction system - something I feel will heighten the sense of community and add another competitive edge to URPG.

What is the faction system?

The faction system is the assigning of URPGers to a team (faction) which they remain a part of for most, if not all, of their time in the URPG. Each faction will compete against the others in annual competitions for bragging rights and potentially prizes, similar to the WAR on PXR. Instead of events like Creative Writing, Drawn Art and Showdown, points can be given to members for placing in battle/contest tournaments, park events and writing/art competitions. Each 'season' will last for the whole year, and there will be no breaks - as soon as the first season ends, the second season will begin and so on. The winner is the team with the most points.

How will teams be decided?

One of the things we want in this is balance - we don't want all of the more experienced members joining one team while newer members join others. This is why I suggest a draft system. Each team (for now, we can call them Red/Blue/Green/Yellow. These can be adapted obviously, but it'd be cool to have some general theme. Alternatives could be something like Oak/Elm/Birch etc) will be lead by a single leader who (potentially alongside any official co-leaders) will take turns picking their new team mates from a pool of everyone who signs up for the faction system. Players who join after the draft will be assigned by leadership in a fair manner, meaning that one team won't be stacked.

How will scoring work?

This will be decided by event. For example, if the FFA tourney just finished, 1st place could get 3 points, 2nd place could get 2 points and 3rd place could get 1 point. I'd suggest leaving it to the organiser, but it'd probably be best to distribute more points for things such as story competitions (as there's less of them annually compared to tournaments). We could also arrange activities which, while not strictly URPG, are part of the URPG culture - iSketch, Transformice, Cards Against Humanity, Board Game Online and so on - which award lesser points.

How is the system beneficial to URPG?

+It could inspire teamwork and boost the sense of community.
+People could try new things to try and win their team points - people who rarely write might want to try and earn some points and give it a go.
+Gives more importance to the big section events and competitions.
+If we do something heavily team based such as Risk again, we have balanced teams ready to go. Similarly, new events utilising the faction system can be created.

What needs to be decided if this is to happen?

My suggestions in italics

1) Number of Factions. I'd probably say 4 is the optimum amount of teams but I also feel 3 or 5 teams could work. We're looking for a number that won't dilute the talent too much, while ensuring there's enough team for this to be fun. It could be worth seeing how many we get signing up before we decide.

2) Faction Leaders. I feel like the obvious choice is picking a group of mods (Monbrey, Winter, Hannah etc.) A potential idea could be to have a separate assigning of other staff members to the factions to help with leading before the member draft begins. The leaders would be responsible for handling any problems in the factions and organising team events. If necessary due to absences, the leadership title can be passed by the leader to anyone they deem responsible.

3) Prizes. Perhaps a reasonable cash prize for the winning team (5k-10k) and some Pokemon prizes for the highest individual point earners regardless of team.

4) The Name. Despite being the one using it, I'm not too sure on the 'faction' name. Alternatives include clans, guilds, houses, teams or tribes.

---

I'm fairly sure there's stuff I forgot to mention, but I was just interested on your opinions on this. It shouldn't be too difficult to implement, and I think it could enhance the URPG system considerably.

The only thing that will probably change is that anybody can apply to become a clan leader, rather than just moderators. There are still a few things that need to be cleared up, and I'm asking of you to fill out the following questionnaire to help us make this work the way you guys want it.

The survey can be found here (https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/8VZC9PJ). I would also appreciate discussion and suggestions in this thread.

 

great idea, always been a fan of this!

i think either get 4 active mods who are willing to actually get on aim or go with 5 times of e4 + champ (+ reserve maybe)

 

w/ question 4 about staying with the same team or leaving a team after a season, wouldn't it also make sense to have an option where you can pick between staying or leaving?

 

I'm all for this. I think it would be awesome however I see this being another thing tossed aside due to activity like the Ladder system

 

The advantage of this system is that it doesn't rely on independent events, the way the ladder relies on specific ladder battles. Instead it would build on the tournaments and general URPG participation that you would be involved in anyway, but provide increased goals and rewards for your team.

 

While I agree with the logic, it would just be a whole lot cleaner to do it one way or another. However, it would be fairly interesting if we went for the former option of keeping the same teams but with a drop-out option at the end of each season, where you get placed back into the draft pool.

@DR, Monbrey summed up your concerns pretty well - I wasn't quite sure how to word it initially.

Keep the questionnaires coming guys, we have 10 responses so far and are always interested in more.

 

Time to open up some more discussion based on questionnaire results - there is still opportunity to vote in the survey, but I thought since this should be happening soonish it'll be best to iron everything out now. I'll be offering out what my final suggestions are based on the results, but they are open to arguments.

Q1. Would you rather there be a draft system in place, or would you prefer them to be assigned by the URPG Staff?

This was almost unanimous, with a 10-1 proportion leaning for a draft system. The draft results will be kept private, to prevent anyone's unhappiness with their draft position.

Q2. Would the giving of points for non-URPG specific games (such as iSketch, Cards Against Humanity and Board Game Online) make you any more interested in participating in these?

The majority of the people would indeed play these games if we could sort out some kind of scoring system (6 would, 4 wouldn't, 1 unsure). These would be relatively rare events (once a month probably) and could potentially stretch to quizzes and mafia.

Q3. How long do you think each season should last? Consider that 11 months will allow a larger amount of scoring events from each section (at least two writing comps, several tournaments, park events etc.)

This was the most mixed response at 7 voting for 5 months and 4 voting for 11 months. While I voted for 11, I'm also now leaning to 5 month periods to keep the system fresh. Seasons will probably start October/April, with September/March being off-season.

Q4. At the end of a season, would you prefer to stay in the teams you are first drafted into, or start from scratch with new teams and potentially new leaders?

Most people wanted new teams (9-2) and I also think that despite my initial desire for the same teams I also would like new teams each season, also for freshness reasons.

Q5. One sticking point the staff and I have been pondering is the inclusion of trades of members between teams. We are asking if you think a trade system will be a good idea. If so, how do you think we could make it work? If not, why would you not want to see one?

This part is the most open to debate, but despite the majority of voters (8-3) wanting a trade system I fear it could get complicated and messy, as well as overall pointless. A system which could fit the best of both worlds is potentially allowing people to drop out and join the free agent pool during free agency period if they desire (as long as the team they'd be leaving wouldn't be heavily unbalanced as a result). I am planning for people who are in the team longer to get better prizes, so they do this at their own risk.

--

Please discuss any of these points, and offer any alternatives if you have one. However, I am happy with what has been planned thus far and barring a complete outcry over some of these points, we're on track to implementing this.

 

This looks pretty awesome, maybe you have a different way of deciding the factions each year, so maybe one year it's personality tests for Harry Potter Houses and the next it's your predominant type of Pokémon or something random

 

I like the idea, but the problem with that is the balance of the teams. If one team ends up full of URPG veterans and another ends up with a bunch of newer players, it really makes the whole system a bit pointless since you're almost certainly going to get a guaranteed winner.

 

What else needs to be decided? I think most if it seems pretty agreed upon ;o

 

Like I said, unless anyone offers a better alternative to the above points, there's really not much. I could've probably pumped this out for a September start but that would mean August will be an off-season month which wouldn't work well due to it being one of the busiest months. Sign-ups and leader applications should be posted soon.

 

Ya, I voted no for trading. That's just too messy, in my opinion. Especially if the "season" is only 5 months and there are new teams each time. I don't really see a reason for trades as it essentially accomplishes the same thing of keeping teams balanced. Plus, this way people are forced to befriend/work with new people more as opposed to the same group of friends.

 

Why is this not a 'thing' already? It sounds amazing.

 

Hmmm, I'm sure the trade system can work out...

Or perhaps members can list what teams they might prefer to be on or what their preferences in general are?

 

But the question begs, assuming with each system the teams are reformed, what is the value of the trade system?

 

Sounds great! When can we start?????