Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckman
how many games have you been to that the host has the time to actually go over an attendance list? they shoudlnt have to. how many times have there been people not sign up and just show up? i'm not condemning those that just show up cus they cant commit simply because they just dont know until a few hours before if they can actually show or not but i woudlnt expect a host to have to resort to identifying everyone that shows up at a field. that'd be insane.
short of policing every persona at everygame i dont see how this would weed out the negative element other than booting them WHEN they get caught doing someting stupid. it'd be a never ending process for the hosts.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckman
...implies that all new people would WANT to learn and be spoken to an treated as a newbie. ....
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle
As hosts we should be doing a better job of knowing who is on the field and what their experience level is.. its in our best interest to know.
If you had to show ID when you register and this gets matched to the sign in sheet ... its not hard to confirm status.
|
I've only run CQB a couple of times. They are confirmed sign up games only...I either personally know everyone that is coming, or they are vouched for by someone I know. It works. 30 people are a real handful...when it hits that number I should be drafting someone(s) to help.
I'd be pretty easy to keep a master list of those who are "Yea" and those who are "Nay". These events are closer knit and less frequent...but entirely manageable.
Each time a newb has shown up, their sponsor is tied to them...not just their first time, but everytime until they're comfortable (and others are comfortable with them). The sponsors aren't just guys who give their buddy a lift to the game...they're switched on about safety and conduct in play.
When newbs know what those expectations are...and that they're going to be under intense scrutiny by not only their sponsor or the host, but every player there...it hits home pretty quick (their litterally quaking in their boots...and then you gently remind them not to fiddle with the safety
). The ones that want to get through it...for those who don't want that, the message is still there...they just don't come back.
These guys have either shown up with next to nothing (I know because I lend out alot of gear/stuff)...or the Cansoft half breeds. It's not the tool...it's the guy holding it.
Real cap load out (mids/lows loaded short is fine) is in play everytime. Hicap guys just don't make it out...or we loan them a load out worth of mags. There hasn't been any "abuse" of borrowing all the time...and I suspect that persons who are habitually unprepared will feel intense pressure to sort themselves out for the next one.
Some of the best games (mil-sims at FTF most notably) have been where there's the checkin list. Check in, pay fee, chrony...good to go. They don't all happen like that, but they should. There's ZERO f*cking around...and that's an great expectation to start out with from minute 1.
Accidents happen, poor judgement happens to the best of us in the heat of battle...but it should be the exception, not the theme of the night.
NOW...mind you...when I'm forking over $35 to not even shoot anything, that kind of sucks. But I don't mind doing it if it's the best thing to do for 20+ other guys. However...when I go to a mil-sim to participate...I'd prefer not being saddled with a 1st timer (depends heavily on the individual though). I don't mind watching over someone while in play at less serious games/skirmishes though...that's the opportune time to do so.
It's up to the hosts to set the bar for the game and ensure that it meets whatever expectations are set. If it's a loose, walk-on, Johny come as you are type game...that's what you're going to get.
Tys