19 replies to this topic

[Amberson]

So, I read the other thread and agree with the arguments in favor of the option to unseat a boss through a studio vote if they don’t log in for an extended time period. However, I would like to add something based on fresh experience...

I don’t know why the original thread is locked (if someone was rude over there, I think they should have been dealt with personally), so I had to create a new one.

Today, my former studio was suddenly deleted. It was mostly dead after the departure of key players, nevertheless it was a fully expanded studio that remained high in the rankings with potential to thrive again under new management. A few weeks ago, a player with a new account took over the studio within hours after they joined. Don’t know if it was a complete newbie or an experienced player with new identity. Regardless, with the help of some other low-level accounts that joined the studio, they unseated the original inactive founder from their boss position and started managing the studio. So far, so good... After all, that’s the point of this feature - to give deteriorating studios the chance of a revival. For a short period, the new boos took care of the studio until today when they just decided to delete it together with their account. And I say what a waste...

If the founder... who’s character is still around, btw... decided to bury it, fine. But for some lvl 30 or whatever to just unilaterally wipe away a studio with a long history and further potential... that’s kind of sad not just for those who spend most of their game life helping to build it into what it was, but even for some former rivals. Other players than me invested lots of real money to upgrade it and I’m sure you could find many users who would be eager to use the studio's potential and continue its legacy, if only they got the chance. But now, because of some fickle intruder it’s no longer possible.

To end on a constructive note, I suggest to not allow new bosses who unseated the original boss via vote out and are in charge only for a short time period to be able delete a studio. If they don’t want to continue playing, ok... delete your account a leave a vacant spot for whoever gets elected to be the next boss.

But yeah, I realize this proposal isn’t in the interest of the devs, who want users to keep spending money on upgrades for new studios, instead of using the benefits on an already expanded studio for free.

[CaptC]

I don't think we are talking about enough money that the devs would care either way.  There aren't very many 'hostile take overs' of fully upgraded studios.

 

To have this happen, the studio had to have open invitations, and essentially no active players. If the original owner... or anyone, for that matter... wanted to 'protect their investment', they should not have left the studio in such a vulnerable state.  They should still be playing there or have left a responsible party in charge.

 

I have seen this happen. It *is* a shame. But... it is like they say about elections. If you don't vote, don't complain about the results.

[Andrea6969]

Maybe it should cost diamonds (minimal 300) to delete a studio as well. If there is only one player left, well, either stay there or recruit somebody else before leave.

All players should be at least 30 days member of the studio before they are able to vote and become boss of the studio.

The founder should have a option to enable or disable voting for the regular 105(?) days before the game eventually delete inactive players. That happened to my former studio. It still exists with three active players, but the founder of it got deleted and all teammates there from a Year ago either moved to other studios as well or retired so one of the three players left who joined later became boss without voting I think. I really hope that studio stays alive awhile because whenever I'll retire, I'd like to go back there for a last few months of casual playing. It's not fully expanded (17/30, 30/50, 27/50, 27/50) but there are memories and as I left there for a higher studio, I promised that I would come back there some day.

[Amberson]

I don't think we are talking about enough money that the devs would care either way. There aren't very many 'hostile take overs' of fully upgraded studios.

To have this happen, the studio had to have open invitations, and essentially no active players. If the original owner... or anyone, for that matter... wanted to 'protect their investment', they should not have left the studio in such a vulnerable state. They should still be playing there or have left a responsible party in charge.

I have seen this happen. It *is* a shame. But... it is like they say about elections. If you don't vote, don't complain about the results.

I agree that the founder and original boss is partly to blame for what happened. The truth is that she didn’t manage the studio properly even when she was still an highly active player. She wasn’t very communicative, didn’t have the best assessment in regards to studio fights selection and didn’t kick out inactives. But it wasn’t a problem, because other people stepped up and took responsibility over these tasks. I was handling most of the daily management through my producer authority, while others helped on a less regular basis. We had people acting as benefactors of the studio, who financed the upgrades and other perks through their diamond donations. It wasn’t the boss who payed for the expansions. Still, everyone respected the boss and when something needed to be done (like producer demotion/promotion), she listened to advice.

At some point, the studio started stagnating because of player's becoming inactive and the inability to find suitable longterm replacements. When I left and the MVP of the studio stopped playing at the same time, it took a heavy hit on the studio. Casuals became even more casual in their playing, and the few high-level daily players departed out of frustration - either right away or after some time. Still, a bunch of casuals remained and probably enjoyed the protections and benefits the studio provided them with. To bounce of what Andrea said, if I ever wanted to become a casual, the studio would have been my perfect retirement home and I would return to it.

I would rather see it thrive again, though. I just wanted to point out that besides the potential, there was still some life left in there and the studio served an utilitarian purpose for its members. What eventually happened really seems, as you said, like a hostile takeover that took advantage of the opportunity to take out an old boss soon after it had arisen. The longterm members weren’t able to react due to their casual way of playing, lack of coordination and absence of motivation to replace the boss themselves. But I doubt they wanted to see the studio go...

Thus, I don’t find the suggestion to implement some protections to prevent such situations from happening to be unreasonable. I think Andrea had some good points on the matter too.

Edited by Amberson, 11 March 2019 - 14:46 PM.

[CaptC]

I can forward the suggestion that safeguards be put in place. Some of the ideas may be reasonable. 

 

But I have to shake my head. It's simply not "your" studio anymore, after you leave. Placing restrictions on the abilities of a duly elected boss, to protect the feelings of departed players? It seems unnecessary at best.

 

The lesson I take from this tale is NOT that the game needs to implement more safeguards against inactive bosses leaving their studio vulnerable. The lesson I take is that a studio with active players, should not allow an inactive boss. Replace them promptly with someone who is logging on. Simple as that.

[Emerald3]

i have a response to share regarding this topic but it's saved on my computer and i am not at home right now. this evening i should be able to have it posted lol

[Amberson]

The lesson I take is that a studio with active players, should not allow an inactive boss. Replace them promptly with someone who is logging on. Simple as that.

In theory, yes. However, this was a very specific situation. In the past, when I was still a member, the boss was an active daily player. As far as I know, she became a casual after the most active people left or stopped playing. If the boss logs in at least sporadically, they can’t be voted out of their position, even if there was the interest to do so (I don’t think it was there in this case, because others were also casuals or zombies waiting to be deleted). It takes 21 days of inactivity before the process can get started. Don’t know if it was accidental or if deliberate coordination was involved, but roughly at the time the opportunity to vote out the boss arised, new accounts joined the studio and took control. After 2 or 3 weeks, the new boss took it down and left the game...

I have a good relationship with one of the casuals, they used to be active on this forum and told me in the past that they didn’t want be the boss. But I think being in a studio of casuals suited their current way of playing. Anyway, thanks for putting the suggestion(s) forward.

Edited by Amberson, 15 March 2019 - 16:41 PM.

[Jason777]

I was lucky taht the whole studio was filled with friends we made and they all wanted the best intentions with the studio. When I had heard from the sisters through a social media that they can't get back anymore into the game, I had asked them if I could lead the studio further. So how I handled that, it was all friends with each other. So that's some good management that was with. 

 

It's all with having a good studio management and trust build in a studio. If you keep a studio to open, that's that studio's own responsability and from the boss (since only the boss can change that open or closed and level and honor cap stuff).

 

It's too sad if a great studio breaks down because of a boss going inactive and some randoms then all join and take advantage of that.

[CaptC]

In theory, yes. However, this was a very specific situation. In the past, when I was still a member, the boss was an active daily player. As far as I know, she became a casual after the most active people left or stopped playing. If the boss logs in at least sporadically, they can’t be voted out of their position, even if there was the interest to do so (I don’t think it was there in this case, because others were also casuals or zombies waiting to be deleted). It takes 21 days of inactivity before the process can get started. Don’t know if it was accidental or if deliberate coordination was involved, but roughly at the time the opportunity to vote out the boss arised, new accounts joined the studio and took control. After 2 or 3 weeks, the new boss took it down and left the game...

I have a good relationship with one of the casuals, they used to be active on this forum and told me in the past that they didn’t want be the boss. But I think being in a studio of casuals suited their current way of playing. Anyway, thanks for putting the suggestion(s) forward.

 

It behooves a good boss to hand over the reins to someone else, if they actually care about their studio. I know I am leaving my studios in a few days, and I have already promoted my replacements. The King is dead! Long live Queen PrissyDey (Busty Spiderbabes/NU1) and Queen PinkySlapalot (Abusement Park/UK1).

 

Bosses who just drift away, instead of finding replacements, are the real villains of this piece. Suck it up, buttercup! Take care of your studio properly!

[Andrea6969]

The lesson I take from this tale is NOT that the game needs to implement more safeguards against inactive bosses leaving their studio vulnerable. The lesson I take is that a studio with active players, should not allow an inactive boss. Replace them promptly with someone who is logging on. Simple as that.

But to replace a inactive boss with ANYONE logging is just as wrong! There must be safeguards against new accounts stealing or ruining other studios.

There really should be some minimal requirements that only producers can take over or members who are member of the studio awhile and are on a higher level that takes more time to play than just a few hours.

And again, nobody but the founder should be able to delete the studio for free in the first place.

 

 Suck it up, buttercup!

There is a player with this name on UK2, she is not even in this topic in the forum. Although this seems to be a (unfelicitous chosen) random phrase, it's a blunder...

[Emerald3]

OP, you were the backbone of that studio. I was a member there for a little while so I know it to be true and I admired you for it. Everyone knows, though, that when you pull the spine out of something, it dies. Doesn't matter why or how at this point... and BBE doesn't have a Hall of Fame or any sort of nostalgia events that I know of, but their graveyard is pretty full.

We also have a bunch of fragmented studios with 100% expansions that serve no purpose other than being easy glory for other studios, or places for people to go for maximum skill point, note and experience increases whenever they want.

I'm trying my best to be sympathetic here, because people seem to be heartbroken over this. What is the real problem? How is it (really) affecting anyone's game? If the boss stopped caring for over three weeks straight, the hardest hitter quits and the one whose been doing ALL the work checks out... then who gives a flying... flip

You will never see a boss on any server who is serious about running their studio ever miss more than 24-48 hours with no word or explanation to their members (or at least to their number one producer.) That's all there is to it.

It's gonna be okay. Go look through your film history if you get sad. Or beat me in a duel if you want. That still seems to be the "go to" method for a lot of old timers when they need to cheer themselves up

[Emerald3]

There is a player with this name on UK2, she is not even in this topic in the forum. Although this seems to be a (unfelicitous chosen) random phrase, it's a blunder...

The Captain doesn't make blunders. Get out ya feelings box

and of what significance was the studio to you, if i may ask? like, were you a previous member who invested money into the studio or were you just out of energy when you posted that?

you should take "suck it up buttercup" trust me and i know CaptC is probably wanting me to shut up like 5 minute ago so... cheers mate!

Edited by Emerald3, 16 March 2019 - 05:28 AM.

[dparadise]

But to replace a inactive boss with ANYONE logging is just as wrong! There must be safeguards against new accounts stealing or ruining other studios.

There really should be some minimal requirements that only producers can take over or members who are member of the studio awhile and are on a higher level that takes more time to play than just a few hours.

And again, nobody but the founder should be able to delete the studio for free in the first place.

 

There is a player with this name on UK2, she is not even in this topic in the forum. Although this seems to be a (unfelicitous chosen) random phrase, it's a blunder...

 

Yet it's still the original boss that is responsible to leave the studio in the hands of a capable replacement. If he or she has stopped caring, all hell breaks loose. Secondly there's a voting process, where the supportive capable players should band together to ensure a good replacement. One can do that by keeping the studio invite-only, and make sure all heads point the same direction.

 

For as far as Capt's comment: Suck it up buttercup, is rather a simple saying.

[CaptC]

Oh, my goodness. It is a movie quote, i think, from an abusive drill sergeant. (I think "abusive drill sergeant" is redundant.) In that context, it is a derisive term indicating that the person you are speaking to, is not being effective, either through laziness or incompetence.

 

I mean no disrespect to anyone actually named buttercup. That statement was aimed at negligent studio bosses, not a player on UK2.

[Emerald3]

I mean no disrespect to anyone actually named buttercup.

must you always be so modest Cap? lol they are bringing it upon themselves. everyone knows you meant no harm because you NEVER mean any harm. seriously, Buttercup is a mild way of saying what some of us are thinking. it's not our fault Buttercup is her alt...i mean wife. XD

cheers!

[Emerald3]

But to replace a inactive boss with ANYONE logging is just as wrong! There must be safeguards against new accounts stealing or ruining other studios.

There really should be some minimal requirements that only producers can take over or members who are member of the studio awhile and are on a higher level that takes more time to play than just a few hours.

And again, nobody but the founder should be able to delete the studio for free in the first place.

 

the "minimum requirements" are having the common courtesy to your studio mates to log in more than once a month

[CaptC]

Civility is free. I simply reject the stupid nonsense rife in our culture, that apologies are a sign of weakness. 

 

To apologize for causing offense, no matter how unintentional, costs me nothing and decreases potential conflict within the community. The tiny amount of effort involved is nothing, and I assure you, my ego is not suffering any damage or diminishment.  

 

  

[Amberson]

No need to make a big deal out of this or trying to determine who’s most at fault for the studio's demise. I’m not heartbroken about it , I just thought it was a waste for a developed studio to go that way and thus suggested the idea of some minor safeguards to be implemented so that withering studios could potentially rise from the ashes again. In a case like this, the pricy "infrastructure" is already there and at immediate disposal for those who are willing to use it in a smart way, so any safeguards that increase the chances of a withering studio's revival instead of sudden deletion might ultimately be in favor of more competition in the game.

Coincidentally, I’m now leaving my current studio and if the old one was still around, at the very least I might have thought about assuming the boss position myself and trying to restart the studio from that capacity... before passing it on to a worthy replacement once I quit the game...

Edited by Amberson, 18 March 2019 - 22:44 PM.

[Andrea6969]

I'm only concerned about the free deletion of a studio. It should cost (many) diamonds to do that unless the founder does it. Anybody could just send a player over to a studio with an inactive boss, only to take over and delete it.

My previous studio still exists but only with three players who joined after I left there.The film history of the studio tells, that they all are active several days per week and I really hope that they hang on until I'll stop the hardcore playing sometime in 2020 I think and would like to go back there for awhile to just play casual when I feel like and without temple and glory pressure. Still help the members to win studio fights and to improve, before I eventually retire in 2021 or so.

[Emerald3]

I'm only concerned about the free deletion of a studio. It should cost (many) diamonds to do that unless the founder does it. Anybody could just send a player over to a studio with an inactive boss, only to take over and delete it.

My previous studio still exists but only with three players who joined after I left there.The film history of the studio tells, that they all are active several days per week and I really hope that they hang on until I'll stop the hardcore playing sometime in 2020 I think and would like to go back there for awhile to just play casual when I feel like and without temple and glory pressure. Still help the members to win studio fights and to improve, before I eventually retire in 2021 or so.

you should be worried about the studio you are in, that's it really. the rest, doesn't apply to you.