A 2S Campaign?

[Sorck]

Your points would go to the team that you signed up for I think.

One thing though, bringing people (especially those who become active) to 2S will get you rather lovely numbers of points.

This depends on how many/what time the pointsmasters (or whatever we decide to call them) are prepared to put in to calculating such points.

What we could do is say if you bring a new member to the forum, you get a certain %age of points they get added to yours as commission, in addition to the points bonus for a new member. So if he writes 5 articles for, say, 50 points - then you yourself get 5 points (10% commission) because you're the reason they are here. This %age of commission isn't deducted from the rightful person that scored them, more added in addition for the player who roped them in.

Therefore it's more rewarding for a current member to get a few players with a real buzz for the hobby in, then it is for them to just force all their facebook friends to sign up with a profile and never view the site again

Don't worry... the points calculations could be done by some server-side code.

Another idea could be to host smaller campaigns within campaigns every 3 or 4 months or so. Say for example, the past guard vs ork campaign. Points in the sub-campaign (perhaps come up with a better word for it in future ) will be tallied in the subcampaign (for relevant articles about the campaign, etc) while also claiming the regular global points. Then, the winning side (order or disorder) would get a large amount of points towards the global campaign for winning a sub campain.  If that makes sense.


Another idea I had is why not limit it to order and disorder. I know, especially with disorder races - they'd like to see where they sit on the ladder of disorder, who to bully on and who to look for allies with, etc. I'm sure the Order factions would also compare for their own cocky and ego gains. So aside from the main global Order v Disorder scores, each board/race/faction could have a subscore - used more with campaigns that involve multiple parties, etc etc.

We could have a secondary system in which we compare the victories of different armies vs each other? Therefore we could come up with a 'score' for the Tyranids, IG etc that shows their relative ranking. We could also rank 2S members in the same ordering system?

[Naser Al-Istikhara Cyrus]

Instead of ranking the members by their points, what about giving each member a score for every army they earn points for.

So my DE might be 4th on the forum, my Orks 7th. Something like that.

[Sorck]

Instead of ranking the members by their points, what about giving each member a score for every army they earn points for.

So my DE might be 4th on the forum, my Orks 7th. Something like that.

With regards to which team the points go towards shouldn't every member have a single-team allegiance rather than points being distributed according to the armies? (e.g. my Orks and IG would both contribute to the team I signed up for rather than the disorder and order teams respectively)

Ranking your individual armies has flaws in that your army list can change over time? I can see the logic though of army-based ordering as long as points go through the same way...
oint

BTW, I'm thinking of using chess-ranking algorithms to rank the power of members/their armies whilst using plain old points for the two teams (i.e. points for wins, points for bat reps, points for contests etc)

[InsaneTD]

I think the points for every game you play should only go to the side you signed up for.

[Hive Lord]

Regarding people who collect multiple armies - you should pick a side to join, but that shouldn't necessarily mean you can't earn points by playing with the other army, or e.g. writing articles for races on the other side. Maybe you'd earn less points for doing this though? I guess for articles, you're essentially stopping someone on the other side writing about the same thing, so essentially 'stealing' points. Possibly a viable tactic...

[Naser Al-Istikhara Cyrus]

Regarding people who collect multiple armies - you should pick a side to join, but that shouldn't necessarily mean you can't earn points by playing with the other army, or e.g. writing articles for races on the other side. Maybe you'd earn less points for doing this though? I guess for articles, you're essentially stopping someone on the other side writing about the same thing, so essentially 'stealing' points. Possibly a viable tactic...

Articles written by a member of order about a unit in Disorder could easily qualify as "Intel" so that they know what they're up against. So as far as article writing is concerned, either side could write for either side with ease.

However when it comes to playing games, that's where it gets messy.

[InsaneTD]

Articles written by a member of order about a unit in Disorder could easily qualify as "Intel" so that they know what they're up against. So as far as article writing is concerned, either side could write for either side with ease.

I love that idea.

[loeldrad]

This sounds awesome! I haven't been active lately but I'll keep checking to see when this gets going.

[Scout Sergeant Mkoll]

I'm game for this. Hopefully I'll be able to be a bit more active on the gaming front and now that 6th is out I can start writing articles/shiny new lists.

Probably going to sign up as Disorder.

[BigToof]

I agree as well!

Maybe Imperium and Friends vs. Everyone else?

The boards are nicely separated as is, and Imperium w/Eldar and Tau vs. all others sounds like a good divide.

Best,
-BT

[loeldrad]

Should we ball Eldar and Tau in with the Imperium? If that's what the majority wants to do I'm for it I just think you might get a more even split with Imperium vs all as there are a ton of space marine players in general.

[crisis_vyper]

Should we ball Eldar and Tau in with the Imperium? If that's what the majority wants to do I'm for it I just think you might get a more even split with Imperium vs all as there are a ton of space marine players in general.

Personally, I prefer the Forces of Neutrality.

[Sorck]

Should we ball Eldar and Tau in with the Imperium? If that's what the majority wants to do I'm for it I just think you might get a more even split with Imperium vs all as there are a ton of space marine players in general.

Personally, I prefer the Forces of Neutrality.

IMHO that's just complicating things.

Anyhow, I'll be putting a poll up momentarily.

[Wargamer]

Well let's see...

Imperial Armies:
Space Marines.
Imperial Guard.
Sisters of Battle.
No others worth speaking of.

"Evil" Armies:
Chaos Space Marines.
Chaos Daemons.
Orks.
Dark Eldar.

We now have four armies left to assign; Eldar, Tau, Necrons and Tyranids. I'd suggest putting the former two with the Imperium and the latter two with Evil.

[Naser Al-Istikhara Cyrus]

Should have an option in the poll for the 3 faction choices. I have a few brainstorming ideas about this, but as long as it a) Makes more logical sense, and b) Is fairly evenish, or we have a way to balanced even teams, then I'll be happy.

Thoughts/Ideas on the factions:
Option A:
Imperium - Marines, Guard, Sisters
Neutral - Eldar, Tau, Necrons, Tyranids
Evil - Chaos SM, Chaos Daemons, Orks, Dark Eldar

Option B:
Imperium - Marines, Guard, Sisters
Uniform - Eldar, Tau, Necrons, Chaos SM/Daemons
Chaotic - Orks, Tyranids, Dark Eldar

I mean, three houses can only make it more compeditive right?

Also, while I dont really want to think of, or new players at the forum to think that the Tau and/or Eldar are Allies of the Imperium. But Stacking them up with all the other teams would make it far too imbalanced IMO. We have enough able-bodied forum users who can be trustworthy and consistent to manage three houses I bet.