Recently I encountered a 'hidden' clarification in the Combat Report rules. I want to raise a complaint that the posted rules do not have clarifications updated as mods and GO's define them. Over the few months I've seen similar cases where rulings are made via some undefined clarification that isn't listed within the rules themselves. I believe this is a major contributing factor to players feeling like the quality of GO and MOD rulings is below par or bias. I've included examples below to help explain:
Combat Reports:
Quote
- All members involved in the combat must be named on the title in the following order [Attacker(s) vs Defender(s)], regardless if it is a regular attack or a ninja.
- If one or more members are part of an alliance at the time of the combat, the alliance names (or tags) need to be included in the title as well.
- The total damage of the combat must be included in the title.
- It is mandatory to use a CR converter before posting it.
I've been told that there is a specific format that this information MUST be typed in, and no additional text what so ever is permitted or the thread will be locked and closed. This format should be specified in the rules so that players can ensure their posts meet this format. While the use of a CR converter is mandatory, I think the 'approved' CR converters should be listed or the existing list should be linked so that players know what tools are actually required. Further, if there is a clarification as to any portion of the CR output that cannot be edited, clarification should be made. If the ruling is that these clarifications 'do not need to be made' then I think its inappropriate to instantly lock and ignore threads that fail to meet them. A warning should be givin or a request for an update to the thread, not a lock & removal for not 'following the rules' which are not actually written.
Quote
- A reasonable contribution is required from all participants in a CR to be considered for a Top 10 ACS hit.
I think this should also be explicitly clarified. I understand the obvious cases, like 1 probe being added, however what if its 10K LF in a 1Bn ToT? If a consensus can be made using numbers like a % of total fleet, or some flat point value that counts as meaningful. Perhaps not stating it as a hard requirement, but just giving an example of what is or isn't meaningful, so that players have some context.
Quote
- If your CR is a New Top 10 CR, please use the label marking it as such, making it easier for the moderation team to identify it.
I've seen different posts on this. I've seen mods REFUSE to touch any post that isn't labeled before them ahead of time, although the "rule" simply says please do x to help. If its a requirement, I think it should be rewritten or clarified as such. As this is written now, it sounds like a suggestion / request. Different mods handle it in different ways which makes some players feel like they are 'picked on'.
I also think the conduct of staff is regularly aggressive and adversarial to players. I frequently see mods and GO's state that its not their job to do things for players or that its not their problem if players don't understand the rules. Personally, I feel the exact opposite. I understand that some players can be more difficult to work with than others and often lines are crossed by players that require a hard-nosed approach by staff, however I feel that staff frequently treat players poorly for no legitimate reason out of frustration, lack of patience, lack of care, or poor customer service. At the end of the day, staff are volunteering to support and help the community, we should not be made to feel like we are a problem that the staff "aren't obligated" to deal with. I think virtually every staff member i've ever seen is guilty of this at one point or another. Having been a member myself, I have empathy for the situations that are often challenging. However, I think alot of improvement needs to be made here as has been needed for a long time.
Lastly, I think timeliness of response from GO's and MOD's is a topic thats consistently brought up by players. I personally understand the nature of volunteer staff and how players expectations for Ticket/Board SLA times might be misaligned, but perhaps thats something that can be clarified. Can we help players understand what to expect from ticket response times, where and how they can be escalated when a situation might be time sensitive and/or identify systems where other staff might be able to step in to assist. As an example.
I have a CR thread thats closed pending a clarification, the mod asked for a PM, then the mod has responded one time over 4 days. Obviously mods have lives too, and a CR thread is far from urgent business, but could I have looped in another person who could assist with basic items while the original responding mod was offline? If the situation were more urgent, could I escalate it somehow? As a player I do not know the answers to these questions and I "complain" that the information to answer them is missing or too hard to find. Can we improve awareness for the community on how to get issues addressed in a timely manner, when time is a factor?
I'm happy to brainstorm ideas on solutions to these problems, but felt just bringing them to the surface was a good start for now. Thanks for taking the time to read and thank you for your work supporting this community.