Skip to content
TORNLIFE More

[OC'S 2.0] Move Members Roles!

Started by Dyno [1043377] on in Suggestions.

6 replies · 275 views · thread synced · 11 days ago · View on torn.com
About this thread

Posts archived: 7 / 7 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch

Counted by TornLife from the archived posts.

Archived posts
7
Discussion span
→
People posting
6
Likes on archived posts
75
Posts by staff, officers and moderators
1
Authority score
52 / 100
Historical score
34 / 100
Story score
47 / 100
Engagement score
62 / 100

Most-liked replies

Dyno [1043377]

Hello everyone,

 

I understand in OC''s 2.0 it is built so members have to actually join OC's and we can no longer just put them into one, but I had an idea!

 

What if members still have to join an OC, but then anyone with OC perms can move them around...

 

Example:

 

A member has joined an OC, you can click on their name and an option to move is there:

 

[image: i.imgur.com]

 

When you click the move option a + will appear on that person's name:

 

[image: i.imgur.com]

 

Then you can drag that person to another role in another OC:

 

[image: i.imgur.com]

 

It does not have to be the same role, you could switch to any other free role slot.

 

Any feedback and/or improvements welcome

 

Dyno

Chedburn [1] Admin Developer

I can't imagine this is something we'd ever do, it goes against the whole aim of OCs 2.0, which transfers the responsibility to the individual members. After all of the work we've put into this system, I would hate see a meta where faction leadership can just say "Join any role on any scenario and we'll just micromanage everyone into the optimal positions".

Dyno [1043377]

We are already kind of having to micromanage and tell members which roles to join. I like OCs 2.0 but I think being able to remove members from a role but not be able to put them in one is a mistake. 

 

It would be alot easier if we could use the API to get individual members CPR too, instead of having them all input it themselves manually on a spreadsheet. 

 

No matter how OC's 2.0 go, they will always be micromanaged in some capacity.

ChatGPT [1762864]

Definitely understand ruling out the possibility of moving members between scenarios. Would you consider this suggestion *just* for roles within a chosen scenario? Or is that ruled out too?

Regeneration [1757073]

I guess the reasonable point is:

OCs 1.0 were not really gameplay relevant for most people. You received an event when someone planned an OC, and one when it was done. Maybe every once in a while you were asked to stay put in torn at completion time. But for 95% of the players that was it.

 

Now, each player needs to get involved for themselves. They need to understand the system, learn about the different scenarios etc.

 

Giving select member the ability to define other peoples OC role might just lead to a meta where most people will just disengage, and let some few people “take the wheel”.

 

I think it’s good where it is. If you find yourself constantly “micromanaging” the same people currently, they are either dumb or you suck at explaining. Ideally, you would teach and enable your members, and make OCs a more active part of their gameplay.

LaZoR50 [663200]

I find it difficult to have to persistently steer my members into not doing the 1/10 difficulty OCs. It will become tedious to get everyone on the same line in that regard. 

 

Truthfully, the o5nky difference between this system and the last (not hating, I love the new system in many ways) is that members can freely join any OC, rather than having someone else set them up into one. At least that system would let me put people in the right place to increase our odds of success. 

 

Now I have to sort micro-manage my way through getting them into the right OCs.

 

 

Perhaps as an alternative, allow us to set a Min/Max difficulty members can join? Seems stupid but that way we can at least set a minimum for which OC difficulty I'd like to have done.