Having been on a team this past summer where everyone bailed or posted irregularly, I am very much for the miss a post, lose a stat point. Miss two posts and be removed. And more than that, I think the person(s) should be barred for a set amount of time before being allowed to even wait list on another team, of any sport. Stat points are precious and hard earned here. Bad pennies should not be allowed to remain in circulation to continue the bad behavior. This is a collaborative writing site and some do not seem to understand the responsibility that entails.

I understand that real life happens, so I might sound harsh, but in my case, players were not posting in the sporting thread but were managing to post away in other chat forums on site each day. One was later rewarded with a position on another team for another sport. Very irksome.

Actions and inactions, have (or should have) consequences... for everyone involved. Bring all three sports together on the penalties, most definitely.

So I suppose I'll be the dissenting voice here. I quite like the way duelling does it currently. As someone who has both had their teammate miss a post and who has missed a post themselves, I think I would've been unhappy in both cases if that would've cost a stat point.

I think, one, not getting your move is already a punishment and incentive enough to want to get your post in, and two, missing a post does not negate all the other work you did for that game. When my teammate missed their post, they still posted in every other round, and discussed strategy with me, (even in the round they missed, ironically). If we had won, I would've felt really bad for them if they had not gotten their point because they had a bad week. Of course, I wouldn't want someone who disappeared mid-duel to get rewarded, but that's a very different situation, since the consequences for a missed move are not usually that impactful (in duelling, at least, I don't know enough about the other sports to have an opinion either way) compared to missing a whole slew of them.

I realise that it seems pretty silly to say 'oh, I didn't have time for a 50 word post', but I don't think the problem here is how long the post is. I think, when someone misses a post because they got busy or something happened in their life that was stressful, it's pretty clear they probably could've found the time to post but they were otherwise preoccupied and it slipped their mind or they lost track of the deadline. I think, if it happens rarely, it feels harsh to punish people for it. (If it doesn't, then removing people from the team or even barring them from participating in sports for a while feels perfectly fair to me).

Also, this might be a weird point, but I also don't love using stat points as the main disincentive against missing a post because they're not guaranteed. That means, a) it's only a disincentive if you think your team has a good chance of winning, b) missing a stat point for a won game due to life circumstances also makes all previous effort on losing games feel unrewarded, and that would be a lousy feeling.

Kim Sato wrote: 9 Feb 2023, 03:44 Your trunks are locked at the start of the match. You can't update them until the duel ends. And the next duel won't take place for awhile after the former match ends, so it gives you more than enough time to 'update your trunk'. You are also given a few reminders before the dueling starts saying that you should make changes to your trunk ahead of time, so you should have enough time to make updates to your trunks before the matches start.

This, for duelling specifically, isn't necessarily true. We've had matches overlap with the next stage because they took too long. The last duel of the first stage this season ended less than two days before the trunks were locked for stage 2. If the deadlines had been any longer, it wouldn't have ended in time, and neither would the one I was in despite it ending in 10 rounds via knock-out, I think there may also have been a third duel that would have overlapped.


For the discussion at large, I am not really sure what to say. Yes, absolutely, there need to be objective activity standards. Loss of stat point and removal from the team if you don't show should stay. Don't hog a spot on the team if you are unable to meet the requirements, there are people waiting and it is a team sport, you're not just letting yourself down. I fully agree with Bea in that regard.

I also understand the intention and fundamentally agree with the notion that the standards should be the same for all three sports. But I also want to point out that there are different expectations between duellists and Quidditch players/broom racers due to the nature of the matches. For Quidd and racing, there is one match for the entire team, and captains keep track of the deadlines and are responsible for handing in the actions. Duelling has 6 matches for each house - speaking from experience, it is a lot for a captain to keep track of every single match, strategy and deadline. I did much of the quasi-captain-ing for the Beaux-Mahou Broomracing team this summer, it is a significant difference. Hence in duelling, duellists have the responsibility to send in their own actions and keep track of their own deadlines. Not sending in an action is counted the same as missing a post, which isn't true for either of the other sports, where if the captain doesn't send in the actions it is not held against the player and has no effect on their stat point or staying on the team.

In that light, making the activity standards the same when the expectations and responsibilities for the players are different would imo be unfair towards duellists, and why I think that losing the stat point only on the second missed post/action was justified. If they are penalised the same, the expectations of them should also be the same - sending in actions should not be their responsibility, and they should not be penalised if it doesn't happen. This would put a higher strain on duelling captains, which I am hesitant to do. There would be more adjustments needed for fairness.

That said - yes, if we can make standards between sports the same while still keeping things fair and not burning out the captain team more, absolutely.

I think the current way things are for dueling is fine, the only thing I have a real issue with is if someone misses sending in an action/doesn't post TWO times in a row. Because that in turn puts the person with them at a disadvantage where it is highly likely the opposing side would win as a result. Going 1 vs 2 essentially gives the other side a double chance to hit, which imo is unfair (if the result of this is because your partner isn't there). So to fix this, something should be done to make it fair for both sides. Either having a staff member come in and play the person's missing partner until they return, letting the lone person have a double chance to roll twice as if they were 2 people (since the opposing side is doing the same thing), bringing in someone else to fill the role missing (but keeping the same current health, abilities and stats), or something else to even the playing field out.

I don't mind if people switch the losing stat point if you miss a post once to losing the stat point if you miss a post twice. But I'd also want to keep the kick off the team if you miss a post/action twice in a row too. Plus, I'd want to have someone jump in and even the playing field if it's twice in a row so that things are fair. Not entirely sure what you'd choose to do but anything is fine with me as long as it isn't 1 vs 2 (unless all participants are there and one side manages to take out 1 person on the opposing team, then it's fine if it's 1 vs 2 because that's just how the cookie crumbles, but if it's 1 vs 2 because your partner is missing and doesn't take the time to get out a 50 word post or send in actions... I think you should get a break somehow).

In addition to this, I also want to suggest adding a second string of a form to duelling- so it's eight people per duel, four at a time. If one person gets knocked out the next person goes in- kind of like Quidditch.
---

But yes, I am fine with the miss 1 post lose a stat point. Miss 2 posts get kicked off. I'm fine with this.

YESSS please do this! I like Clark/Noah's idea! Dueling should have a second string so if a person ends up missing 2 actions/posts in a row, the first one on the waitlist goes in to replace them!

Okay, my initial, post, and experience, was posted from a broom racer's perspective. Now having read Dealla's post, and understanding a bit more about the difference in responsibilities between Captains and players of the broom sports vs dueling, I understand a little more why there is a difference to begin with now. And I would state that like her, I would like to see it kept as is in dueling.

Much as anyone would like it to be, life is not always fair. So, perhaps the answer here needs to be that in each of the house threads where people sign up for whichever sport, keeping penalties as they currently are, it is made clear what the expectations of the players are AND what the penalties are for failure to post. They can make their determination at that point whether they wish to join or not. Maybe it is okay to have an orange amidst two apples and everything does not need to be exactly equalized.

I do, however, stand by my suggestion that barring the joining of another sport's waitlist, or team proper, by flagrant player(s) who have missed posts, be implemented. That may be a consideration for another time.

And I may be an outlier, here, but I do not like the idea of having a second string for dueling teams. Dueling is not a broom sport. I think of it like a tennis match with doubles. Part of the draw for me, at least, is seeing what can be accomplished in a more target focused setting. Having backups changes that whole dynamic if there is always someone else to step into the match at any given point.

IC having backups might be a little strange but OOC it's unfair to do 1 vs 2 if it's only that way because your partner went MIA. If it keeps happening all the time - like for dueling if there are 4 times per year that you engage in a duel and you're unlucky enough to get inactive partners for all 4 times and because of that reason you end up losing all 4 of your matches because of this, that's really unfair.

I know it's unlikely to have all 4 of your matches turn out like this but it's not impossible. Yes, life isn't fair but HiO seems to take pride in making everything fair for everyone and seems to always have done this. It's something I actually like about this site, they do their best to make sure it remains fair for everyone. As much as is possible anyway. Real life isn't HiO life. It's better, which is why we're here!

Real life doesn't tend to be fair but HiO life does tend to be fair.

As for making sure people are aware when they join that they are committing their time to this, I think they already understand this and accept these conditions at the time. But then for some reason when the actual time comes... (I'm not saying this about everyone but if you happen to get unlucky at the time - your partner might go MIA for multiple posts/weeks and may not even tell anyone this at all)

When they end up going MIA... it's frustrating to the person who is supposed to be their partner. At least to me it is. But that's just my opinion. I don't know if others feel the same way.

Like I said, missing a post/action one time it acceptable if it's a real life emergency. But missing two posts/actions in a ROW is not because you made a commitment when you signed up. You should commit and if you have to pull out bc of a real life thing that's completely fine because we all have lives. But then imo I think someone should take their place so it's not disadvantageous for your side. The duel was set up to give each side a fair chance. 2 vs 2. So it should remain that way unless one side takes out 1 member of the other side making it 1 vs 2.

Or if people think it's too much work to figure out a way to make it 2 vs 2 if a person goes MIA for over 2 posts/actions in a row, maybe consider the dueling person's (the one left behind) history for dueling. If it's the 2nd or 3rd or 4th time in a row that they've lost the match because their partner went MIA and left them on their own, maybe they get special circumstances. Not an advantage because that would be unfair to the opponents but special circumstances. Such as what I said before - if their next match after all of their losses (bc of MIA partner) also has someone who becomes MIA in the match, someone from the waitlist steps in and becomes that person's partner JUST for the remainder of the duel. To give the unfortunate duelist a chance to win rather than 100% lose again.

I agree with the sentiment of keeping the rule; otherwise, everyone suffers due to one (or more depending on the situation) person’s inability to post. It’s not too harsh—you know what you’re signing up for. However, I agree with Piérre and Marcus that having the weekend in the posting window would be beneficial.

In light of Dee's explanation on sports mechanics, I am hesitant to change the stat rule currently in place. If there was a way to make it fairer between the sports in terms of responsibility, then yes, make it even with my first thought, 1 missed post-lose of stat point, 2 missed posts-removal from the team.

Due to the mechanics being so different in terms of responsibility, I think it would be hard for the dueling captains to 6 matches compared to the one in the other sports. Again like Dee, if there was a way to make this fairer, then I'd say the rule above should be changed to 1 missed post-missed stat, 2 missed posts- removal from the team. The only way I can think of is if you split the responsibility between the 3 dueling captains for the match. Each captain is responsible for two matches for a stage. Ultimately, this is still unfair over quidditch/broom racing, as they only have to be in charge of 1 match with multiple captains for it, compared to the 1 in dueling.

I agree with Kim and Clark to some extent. If a person misses two posts or becomes MIA, then yes, someone from the waitlist, or 'second string' should be able to step in. Otherwise it creates an unfair advantage towards the other team, and considering how long some duels go for, I'd say this was more than fair. But, I disagree that this be a permanent fixture with 8 people in the round. Some rounds are long enough with four people. If we were to change and add more people, it kind of defeats the purpose of said duel, which is to injure and knock out your opponent. I agree with AngelFyre on this.