Battalion of the Month Feedback and Q&A

[Marvel]

I'm making this post in order to gather feedback and answer any questions regarding Battalion of the Month. I started this at the beginning of 2023 primarily as a way to bring back Event Server deployments at least once a month and just reward a battalion for their hard work that same month. I'm aware the system isn't perfect and I know competitions like this will always have some sort of negativity behind them when people get upset when someone else get's it rather than them but I think it went rather well other than a few bumps in the road.

I just wanted to get community feedback on the system or just answer any questions anyone may have. If this is a system that people don't enjoy or no longer want to happen then I can shut it down but if people still want it to be supported going forward that's what I'll do.

So if you have any feedback, positive or negative, or any questions please leave them below and I'll be sure to acknowledge and answer them! If you don't want to say or ask anything publicly feel free to DM it to me as well.

[Arizona]

I enjoy it I think it’s a good system and works well 

[Bleach]

#CTsForBOTM2024

[Banshoodle]

Allow Naval and CTs to enter

[Marvel]

4 minutes ago, Banshoodle said:

Allow Naval and CTs to enter

Neither of them are battalions so no

[Jafman]

I really enjoy the friendly competition against the other battalions and I think it does a good job at keeping the server engaged and active. It gives players more of an incentive to play on the server as well as to help their battalions.

[Bleach]

14 minutes ago, Marvel said:

Neither of them are battalions so no

Since when are CTs not a battalion? They have more numbers than some of the ACTUAL batts sometime. Let them cook.

[Jafman]

25 minutes ago, Bleach said:

#CTsForBOTM2024

HAHAHAHA I love this! 😂 Sadly it won’t ever be possible but we should give CT achievable ranks!!! 

[Tec]

expand to include factions

take Jedi numbers less into account

Edited December 4, 2023 by Tec

[Marvel]

4 minutes ago, Tec said:

expand to include factions

What would we call this unironically

[Tec]

1 minute ago, Marvel said:

What would we call this unironically

Keep the name and just not have it be that deep?

or idk Unit of the Month lmfao? Group of Star Wars nerds of the month?

[Marvel]

2 minutes ago, Tec said:

Keep the name and just not have it be that deep?

or idk Unit of the Month lmfao? Group of Star Wars nerds of the month?

Just wanted to see.

Regardless Factions wouldn't be included due to the comparison between them and battalions just wouldn't be the same. It's already pretty difficult to compare some battalions with one another Factions just wouldn't fit in.

They don't get recruits or host trainings like battalions, which stats isn't the only thing we look at, and every faction is significantly different than the other they'd be difficult to compare to one another even then. Also no offense but Jedi outclass the other two quite a lot because they just have more going for them than the other two. That isn't their fault but it's just how it is.

Also there only being 3 factions would not go very good if we decided to implement a separate system for Faction of the Month per say. It would quite literally end up being Jedi every other month getting it. I have toyed around with the idea of making it every 3 months but again comparing the factions to one another isn't easy and it just isn't that simple.

[Mystic]

I think the toxicity it creates under covers is wild. People are harsh on BOTM members. 

Everyone knows they're essentially the 3rd choice for BOTM if its not 212th. Nobody can keep up to 212ths man power and everyone who isnt 212th getting that knows. 

From what ive seen back to back BOTM is not possible, for good reasons like stated above. But its really just kinda meh at this point. The deployments are less the incentive as much as the hangar or own stand. I just think BOTM just rewards the battalion with the most manpower, and those that get it after a battalion like 212th feel less accomplished because they know they weren't actually #1. 

It also gives certain people a weird elitism kick. 

[KaiserNeiner]

One of the few things I would've liked to see over the year is a clarification for how battalions should be logging things. I would have liked to have Joint Trainings clearly outlined as what they mean, along with how we should log batt specific trainings. For example

A SIM hosted by a battalion that they open to anyone should not be logged a joint training. They should be mini events or trainings that are pre-planned between two battalions or an entire REG. OR outline that it can be that, and communicate that with battalions. 

Batt specific trainings should only be logged if there attendees, not that they're just being hosted. 

Is the fact that ATK battalions only having access to 1 batt specific training taken into account every month? 212th can only training for boarding, and 501st can only train for EOD, where all MECH regiments can do 2. If it's not being taken into account, it should be. 

212th used to get really frustrated at the start of the year with BOTM, but our mindset has actually really improved I think. Obviously one off comments are made, but overall every battalion is pretty civil with each other. 


The BIGGEST hype for BOTM is the deployment. Our last 212th BOTM deployment was FANTASTIC. Best event I have ever been apart of. Maybe that's cuz the GM team doing it was awesome, maybe it's because we had Xaze and Baron as EJ's, or maybe I was just grateful to be with my battalion. The hangar is fun, the stand is eh, but I'm not sure what else could be offered. 

[Tec]

40 minutes ago, Marvel said:

Just wanted to see.

SORRY THAT TONE WASN'T GREAT <3
just genuinely didn't have a good answer lmfao

 

40 minutes ago, Marvel said:

Regardless Factions wouldn't be included due to the comparison between them and battalions just wouldn't be the same. It's already pretty difficult to compare some battalions with one another Factions just wouldn't fit in.

They don't get recruits or host trainings like battalions, which stats isn't the only thing we look at, and every faction is significantly different than the other they'd be difficult to compare to one another even then. Also no offense but Jedi outclass the other two quite a lot because they just have more going for them than the other two. That isn't their fault but it's just how it is.

Also there only being 3 factions would not go very good if we decided to implement a separate system for Faction of the Month per say. It would quite literally end up being Jedi every other month getting it. I have toyed around with the idea of making it every 3 months but again comparing the factions to one another isn't easy and it just isn't that simple.

I kind of disagree, In my mind, I look at it as a bit more general "who's improved the most" system where we compare battalions to themselves previously and then overall rather than just to each other in a competition-like manner.

We could look at other similar yet different stats though for factions?
Recruitments: are pretty straightforward. Younglings to Padawans, Cadets to Crewmen Apprentice, Civs to Hunters.
General Activity:  Should also be pretty straightforward, maybe looked at a bit more generally to compare the faction to where it was previously to where it is now. This way you take Jedi's massive numbers less into account.
Promoting Roleplay: Also pretty much the same for factions, just a little different ways of doing so. Naval. Jedi, and Civ all create roleplay differently than say 212th or 104th, but they all still create roleplay.
Trainings Hosted: Could be literal trainings like Consular/Sentinel/Guardian training for Jedi, entertainment and ENG/MED/ATC for Naval, then Spy/Evals for the guild and whatever else statistic they wanna look for. Bounties completed?

Either way doesn't necessarily have to be a competition This vs that statistics thing. Imo BOTM should be more about battalion/faction improvement first with that secondary aspect of competition. Compare battalions to themselves a month ago, then to one another. Ask "Did this battalion really improve from where they were a month ago?" not just "Did they have more numbers and stats than everyone else?" Yes, you already do this a little, but I think we should remove a bit of the rigidness to the qualifications for BOTM. May also help with Mystic's problem of 212th dominating.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Tec
comprehension

[Hanz]

It promotes trainings which are annoying and nobody wants to do them. Most battalions have requirements now because of BOTM and I have even seen training requirements for officers which is ridiculous. The deployment thing is pretty cool but that wouldn't be an issue if we had event server back fully. Overall I don't care for it and the effects of it are annoying to me.

[Kortnul]

This might be a bit of a hot take but I think BOTM's biggest weakness is that there isn't enough incentive to go for it. 1 event server deployment, a stand, and a hangar bay that, as far as I've seen, is rarely if ever used. Maybe it's just me but I see that as pretty meager rewards for the insane amount of trainings and recruits that some battalions get, for example 212th breaking it's own recruitment record last month with 107 new recruits. I don't know personally what an apt reward would be but I think what it is now is pretty meh and some people might not strive to get it. I could also be looking at this at a totally wrong angle and sound pretentious as hell but that is my honest thoughts.

I agree with Hanz about how the event server deployment is cool but that's like nerfing a weapon 10 times then buffing it once and saying "Hey look we fixed it." Considering the fact that we had the event server for public use and now it's off limits unless we hit 90 pop or BOTM.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Kortnul

[EODmanKarl]

Like the overall feel and gives batallions something to compete for as well as having  the possibility to make batallions a little more active, however I believe the selections process is a bit botched

[Jafman]

1 hour ago, Mystic said:

I think the toxicity it creates under covers is wild. People are harsh on BOTM members. 

Everyone knows they're essentially the 3rd choice for BOTM if its not 212th. Nobody can keep up to 212ths man power and everyone who isnt 212th getting that knows. 

From what ive seen back to back BOTM is not possible, for good reasons like stated above. But its really just kinda meh at this point. The deployments are less the incentive as much as the hangar or own stand. I just think BOTM just rewards the battalion with the most manpower, and those that get it after a battalion like 212th feel less accomplished because they know they weren't actually #1. 

It also gives certain people a weird elitism kick. 

I think it encourages players to push harder for the next BOTM. The competition is the best!

[Mystic]

17 minutes ago, Jafman said:

I think it encourages players to push harder for the next BOTM. The competition is the best!

A TON of people disagree. It's disheartening if anything. Glad you think the competition is fun, but other people don't enjoy doing 60-70+ trainings monthly or sitting around for 7 hours to get 3 recruits just for them to not even be in the running for BOTM because another battalion decided theyre gonna double their numbers because they have 4x the amount of active people

[Marvel]

2 hours ago, Mystic said:

I think the toxicity it creates under covers is wild. People are harsh on BOTM members. 

Everyone knows they're essentially the 3rd choice for BOTM if its not 212th. Nobody can keep up to 212ths man power and everyone who isnt 212th getting that knows. 

From what ive seen back to back BOTM is not possible, for good reasons like stated above. But its really just kinda meh at this point. The deployments are less the incentive as much as the hangar or own stand. I just think BOTM just rewards the battalion with the most manpower, and those that get it after a battalion like 212th feel less accomplished because they know they weren't actually #1. 

It also gives certain people a weird elitism kick. 

Any competition will create toxicity. Unfortunately that's just human nature. I make an effort to check every battalion discord every month after announcing BOTM to stomp out any negativity I can find as best as I can and I've made an effort to talk to most every BCMD/CMDs in the last year about doing so themselves. There is no surefire way to avoid that and not doing things because people could be toxic isn't a solution either.

As for the 212th comments I've made it quite clear in the past that sheer statistics and manpower are not what we look for when choosing BOTM. Every battalion is different. Some pull much larger stats than others especially 212th but that's why nobody can get it originally two months in a row and now we keep it at 3 or at least once per BCMD term because yes if we looked at stats alone 212th would get it most months. That isn't how it works. The #1 thing we look for is improvement and after that we look and discuss whether or not the battalion is promoting activity, roleplay, positive attitudes/mindsets and are striving to be better that month. All of those things typically produce a large increase in recruitments and trainings which means they will have good stats as well but that is not all we look at therefore 212th I think has only gotten it 3 months actually. Nobody is a 2nd or 3rd choice in BOTM. We don't rank it like that.

Elitism is cringe and I would hope you would report it to that battalion's leadership if it was happening. If it's the battalion leadership being elitist report it to me.

2 hours ago, KaiserNeiner said:

One of the few things I would've liked to see over the year is a clarification for how battalions should be logging things. I would have liked to have Joint Trainings clearly outlined as what they mean, along with how we should log batt specific trainings. For example

A SIM hosted by a battalion that they open to anyone should not be logged a joint training. They should be mini events or trainings that are pre-planned between two battalions or an entire REG. OR outline that it can be that, and communicate that with battalions. 

Batt specific trainings should only be logged if there attendees, not that they're just being hosted. 

Is the fact that ATK battalions only having access to 1 batt specific training taken into account every month? 212th can only training for boarding, and 501st can only train for EOD, where all MECH regiments can do 2. If it's not being taken into account, it should be. 

212th used to get really frustrated at the start of the year with BOTM, but our mindset has actually really improved I think. Obviously one off comments are made, but overall every battalion is pretty civil with each other. 


The BIGGEST hype for BOTM is the deployment. Our last 212th BOTM deployment was FANTASTIC. Best event I have ever been apart of. Maybe that's cuz the GM team doing it was awesome, maybe it's because we had Xaze and Baron as EJ's, or maybe I was just grateful to be with my battalion. The hangar is fun, the stand is eh, but I'm not sure what else could be offered. 

Like I've explained to you before every battalion has different logging systems. There is no universal logging system and there probably never will be as that will force every battalion to log everything the same. Some things we do audit when we get stats and sometimes that has gotten us behind when selecting a BOTM. Battalion Specific Trainings for example we only really count ones with actual attendees but some battalions reward their troopers for even attempting to host their trainings. We're not going to force them to change up their systems for this so when we get crazy stats from someone or if there's a battalion I know that logs that way I'll double check and get a better estimate. Again stats aren't the defining factor regardless. Joint Trainings are the same. Some battalions log joint trainings as any training involving other troopers from other battalions and some only log them as planned events between their battalion and another. In my eyes the latter is a Joint Training but some battalions again log this differently because they encourage their troopers to invite others to their trainings and what not all the time.

One battalion owning more trainings than another has no significant impact on BOTM. It does not matter. Again stats aren't the end all be all but it's something we track. Having an extra training than other battalions doesn't really mean they can pump out more it just means they have variety when they do host stuff. 212th even with 1 training usually beats the battalions with 2 regardless so it's really just meaningless having 1 or having 2.

The first 4 or 5 months of BOTM was a little bit of a battle with multiple issues with attitude but I'm glad to say since then everyone's attitudes towards BOTM and each other has significantly improved. Yes there will still be people getting upset that's natural but it isn't nearly as bad as it used to be and 212th was never the only one with this issue.

I won't lie when I say the whole point of this was the ES deployment. The Hangar and stand were just included in it as extra rewards and I know they aren't crazy cool or anything but that's comparing it to your very own special deployment. I'd love to add more rewards but personally that's all I could come up with but I'm always open to ideas.

1 hour ago, Tec said:

SORRY THAT TONE WASN'T GREAT <3
just genuinely didn't have a good answer lmfao

 

I kind of disagree, In my mind, I look at it as a bit more general "who's improved the most" system where we compare battalions to themselves previously and then overall rather than just to each other in a competition-like manner.

We could look at other similar yet different stats though for factions?
Recruitments: are pretty straightforward. Younglings to Padawans, Cadets to Crewmen Apprentice, Civs to Hunters.
General Activity:  Should also be pretty straightforward, maybe looked at a bit more generally to compare the faction to where it was previously to where it is now. This way you take Jedi's massive numbers less into account.
Promoting Roleplay: Also pretty much the same for factions, just a little different ways of doing so. Naval. Jedi, and Civ all create roleplay differently than say 212th or 104th, but they all still create roleplay.
Trainings Hosted: Could be literal trainings like Consular/Sentinel/Guardian training for Jedi, entertainment and ENG/MED/ATC for Naval, then Spy/Evals for the guild and whatever else statistic they wanna look for. Bounties completed?

Either way doesn't necessarily have to be a competition This vs that statistics thing. Imo BOTM should be more about battalion/faction improvement first with that secondary aspect of competition. Compare battalions to themselves a month ago, then to one another. Ask "Did this battalion really improve from where they were a month ago?" not just "Did they have more numbers and stats than everyone else?" Yes, you already do this a little, but I think we should remove a bit of the rigidness to the qualifications for BOTM. May also help with Mystic's problem of 212th dominating.

This is how we've always viewed it. Stats are tracked just to be able to see battalion stats and all that jazz but by no means is that the only thing we take into consideration. Even looking past all that the system just still in my eyes not cut out for Factions. They are very different beasts. Also that would be 12 groups for 12 months and I would like to be able to have some groups get a shot at BOTM more than once and I definitely don't want someone to miss out on it. I don't want a battalion to think oh we got it January that means we cant get it again for the rest of the year.

1 hour ago, Hanz said:

It promotes trainings which are annoying and nobody wants to do them. Most battalions have requirements now because of BOTM and I have even seen training requirements for officers which is ridiculous. The deployment thing is pretty cool but that wouldn't be an issue if we had event server back fully. Overall I don't care for it and the effects of it are annoying to me.

It... promotes trainings... and that's a problem? Requirements were not created because of BOTM. Requirements have quite literally existed for years. Requiring officers to do things also just isn't ridiculous they should be expected to do things regardless. Also I have no control over the return of Event Server so please do not correlate that with BOTM and bash BOTM because of that. Me creating BOTM deployments is what got our foot in the door for ES to return even if it was once a month. Now we use it more than that but regardless the status of Event Server is a completely different topic.

1 hour ago, Kortnul said:

This might be a bit of a hot take but I think BOTM's biggest weakness is that there isn't enough incentive to go for it. 1 event server deployment, a stand, and a hangar bay that, as far as I've seen, is rarely if ever used. Maybe it's just me but I see that as pretty meager rewards for the insane amount of trainings and recruits that some battalions get, for example 212th breaking it's own recruitment record last month with 107 new recruits. I don't know personally what an apt reward would be but I think what it is now is pretty meh and some people might not strive to get it. I could also be looking at this at a totally wrong angle and sound pretentious as hell but that is my honest thoughts.

I agree with Hanz about how the event server deployment is cool but that's like nerfing a weapon 10 times then buffing it once and saying "Hey look we fixed it." Considering the fact that we had the event server for public use and now it's off limits unless we hit 90 pop or BOTM.

I mean I guess sure. I wouldn't say a deployment for your battalion is meager but I can agree with the other two. They were just tossed in alongside the deployment and I would love for more rewards if you've got any ideas. I wouldn't say they're lame by any means the hangar is a way for a battalion to express themselves and a cool hangout spot for them that month and the stand is just a way for the battalion to show off in DB for that month as we have literally 100s of DBs a day. However I don't think the rewards are the problem and I don't think they correlate with a battalion's stats that get BOTM either. It's an interesting angle though and I agree more rewards would be nice but I've got nothing else I can think of and I'm open to ideas always.

Also to reiterate the status of Event Server is not within my control so please do not use it as a reason to hate on BOTM. :/

58 minutes ago, Znox_Aquaz2 said:

however I believe the selections process is a bit botched

 Please elaborate. As the person that spearheaded the selection of every BOTM this year I would very much like to know how our selection process is botched.

[Mystic]

21 minutes ago, Marvel said:

Any competition will create toxicity. Unfortunately that's just human nature. I make an effort to check every battalion discord every month after announcing BOTM to stomp out any negativity I can find as best as I can and I've made an effort to talk to most every BCMD/CMDs in the last year about doing so themselves. There is no surefire way to avoid that and not doing things because people could be toxic isn't a solution either.

As for the 212th comments I've made it quite clear in the past that sheer statistics and manpower are not what we look for when choosing BOTM. Every battalion is different. Some pull much larger stats than others especially 212th but that's why nobody can get it originally two months in a row and now we keep it at 3 or at least once per BCMD term because yes if we looked at stats alone 212th would get it most months. That isn't how it works. The #1 thing we look for is improvement and after that we look and discuss whether or not the battalion is promoting activity, roleplay, positive attitudes/mindsets and are striving to be better that month. All of those things typically produce a large increase in recruitments and trainings which means they will have good stats as well but that is not all we look at therefore 212th I think has only gotten it 3 months actually. Nobody is a 2nd or 3rd choice in BOTM. We don't rank it like that.

Elitism is cringe and I would hope you would report it to that battalion's leadership if it was happening. If it's the battalion leadership being elitist report it to me.

Like I've explained to you before every battalion has different logging systems. There is no universal logging system and there probably never will be as that will force every battalion to log everything the same. Some things we do audit when we get stats and sometimes that has gotten us behind when selecting a BOTM. Battalion Specific Trainings for example we only really count ones with actual attendees but some battalions reward their troopers for even attempting to host their trainings. We're not going to force them to change up their systems for this so when we get crazy stats from someone or if there's a battalion I know that logs that way I'll double check and get a better estimate. Again stats aren't the defining factor regardless. Joint Trainings are the same. Some battalions log joint trainings as any training involving other troopers from other battalions and some only log them as planned events between their battalion and another. In my eyes the latter is a Joint Training but some battalions again log this differently because they encourage their troopers to invite others to their trainings and what not all the time.

One battalion owning more trainings than another has no significant impact on BOTM. It does not matter. Again stats aren't the end all be all but it's something we track. Having an extra training than other battalions doesn't really mean they can pump out more it just means they have variety when they do host stuff. 212th even with 1 training usually beats the battalions with 2 regardless so it's really just meaningless having 1 or having 2.

The first 4 or 5 months of BOTM was a little bit of a battle with multiple issues with attitude but I'm glad to say since then everyone's attitudes towards BOTM and each other has significantly improved. Yes there will still be people getting upset that's natural but it isn't nearly as bad as it used to be and 212th was never the only one with this issue.

I won't lie when I say the whole point of this was the ES deployment. The Hangar and stand were just included in it as extra rewards and I know they aren't crazy cool or anything but that's comparing it to your very own special deployment. I'd love to add more rewards but personally that's all I could come up with but I'm always open to ideas.

This is how we've always viewed it. Stats are tracked just to be able to see battalion stats and all that jazz but by no means is that the only thing we take into consideration. Even looking past all that the system just still in my eyes not cut out for Factions. They are very different beasts. Also that would be 12 groups for 12 months and I would like to be able to have some groups get a shot at BOTM more than once and I definitely don't want someone to miss out on it. I don't want a battalion to think oh we got it January that means we cant get it again for the rest of the year.

It... promotes trainings... and that's a problem? Requirements were not created because of BOTM. Requirements have quite literally existed for years. Requiring officers to do things also just isn't ridiculous they should be expected to do things regardless. Also I have no control over the return of Event Server so please do not correlate that with BOTM and bash BOTM because of that. Me creating BOTM deployments is what got our foot in the door for ES to return even if it was once a month. Now we use it more than that but regardless the status of Event Server is a completely different topic.

I mean I guess sure. I wouldn't say a deployment for your battalion is meager but I can agree with the other two. They were just tossed in alongside the deployment and I would love for more rewards if you've got any ideas. I wouldn't say they're lame by any means the hangar is a way for a battalion to express themselves and a cool hangout spot for them that month and the stand is just a way for the battalion to show off in DB for that month as we have literally 100s of DBs a day. However I don't think the rewards are the problem and I don't think they correlate with a battalion's stats that get BOTM either. It's an interesting angle though and I agree more rewards would be nice but I've got nothing else I can think of and I'm open to ideas always.

Also to reiterate the status of Event Server is not within my control so please do not use it as a reason to hate on BOTM. :/

 Please elaborate. As the person that spearheaded the selection of every BOTM this year I would very much like to know how our selection process is botched.

I'm a little offput by that though.

If its not stats why announce stats for a battalion such as 212th and 501st that double everyone else's numbers? Your exact reasoning for their BOTM on the post actually, was strictly hitting record numbers? If its not based of JUST numbers and its instead based on overall battalion growth etc I don't see why 212th is one of only two battalions currently to have won more than once. Plenty of battalions have had solid numbers and a good turn around or consistent turnouts to be considered for BOTM. 212th is definitely deserving of it every month to be honest, but if the reason for their BOTM isn't just stats then you need to be open about the reasons. As all you stated were their stats, then you turn around and say its not just about those.  This month IMO should've been RANCOR. Leaderless they have been doing AMAZING with their scheduled ARC trainings, they have a huge presence on server and had 2 BCMD applicants and a new BCMD. They've stepped up wholly and its noticeable by everyone on server. 

212th has been BEYOND consistant. However if they triple your average battalions active roster in just their NCO ranks its really a given they'll have more trainings (they have 71 NCOs as of current for anyone curious about the number). Kaiser has done phenomenal but to be honest 212th has been peaking this year. Is that really improvement or just consistency? The overall pop on server has picked up, naturally 212ths numbers will as well.  I guess what im getting at is why do stats claim to not be the deciding factor when its all thats ever stated? More transparency on the votes would be nice i guess.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Mystic

[Marvel]

2 minutes ago, Mystic said:

I'm a little offput by that though.

If its not stats why announce stats for a battalion such as 212th and 501st that double everyone else's numbers? Your exact reasoning for their BOTM on the post actually, was strictly hitting record numbers? If its not based of JUST numbers and its instead based on overall battalion growth etc I don't see why 212th is the only battalion currently to have won more than once. Plenty of battalions have had solid numbers and a good turn around or consistent turnouts to be considered for BOTM. 212th is definitely deserving of it every month to be honest, but if the reason for their BOTM isn't just stats then you need to be open about the reasons. As all you stated were their stats, then you turn around and say its not just about those. 

212th has been BEYOND consistant. However if they triple your average battalions active roster in just their NCO ranks its really a given. Kaiser has done phenomenal but to be honest 212th has been peaking this year. Is that really improvement or just consistency? The overall pop on server has picked up, naturally 212ths numbers will as well.  I guess what im getting at is why do stats claim to not be the deciding factor when its all thats ever stated? More transparency on the votes would be nice i guess.

Stats are not the only thing I talked about when announcing 212th getting BOTM. I state them every month just to let everyone know hey this is the work they've done that I can show you. I can't just say they were active, I liked them. In this most recent BOTM announcement I talked about 212th's massive push for in-game engagement and roleplay primarily with a system they pushed out recently in-house that keeps their guys active, engaged, and involved with the server. Obviously I hyped up their recruitment numbers too because they had a crazy amount of recruits a number that Synergy has not seen since like 2019. I'm very open about the reasons a battalion gets BOTM and tbh while 212th has been consistent they had a little dip in recent months and in this last month they made another large push again which was again another reason they got BOTM. Also 212th is not the only battalion to have won more than once. 501st and CG have both one it twice and next month will allow another battalion maybe even 501st or CG to win it again.

We did not and do not ever look at 212th and say eh might as well give it to them they are so much large than everyone else and give it to them overall battalion size has nothing to do with our decision. Every battalion is different we don't look at a roster and say omg they have this many people they get BOTM. That just makes no sense. To reiterate what I said on my post btw

On 12/2/2023 at 5:13 PM, Marvel said:

Honestly what more can I say that everyone doesn't already know. 212th has been consistently one of the top battalions for over a year straight at this point with no end in sight. Once again they have achieved BOTM this year and to into more detail on why specifically they hit record breaking numbers with recruits this month, have made a large push for in-game engagement and roleplay with their newly introduced Outpost Schedule system, and have been extremely active, engaged, and cooperative with the rest of the server. This month they got a total of 156 recruits, hosted 204 trainings and entertainments, 56 boarding trainings, 29 joint trainings, and trained 159 new CRs. These stats are beyond amazing and we have never seen recruitment numbers like that in a very, very long time. Continue to go strong 212th as we head into the new year here soon.

"have made a large push for in-game engagement and roleplay with their newly introduced Outpost Schedule system, and have been extremely active, engaged, and cooperative with the rest of the server." Not once did I say the only reason they got it was their record breaking recruitment numbers. That was one of the reasons sure but it definitely was not the only reason.

[KaiserNeiner]

16 minutes ago, Mystic said:

If its not stats why announce stats for a battalion such as 212th and 501st that double everyone else's numbers? Your exact reasoning for their BOTM on the post actually, was strictly hitting record numbers? 

One of our biggest achievements internally this month was the recruitment number. Since 2018, the record number for 212th recruits in a month was 135. Once we started getting close to that number, I pushed our guys to break it, not based on BOTM, but based on setting a monumental record within our own batt. I hope I get to see the day that that record is broken again at 157. 

[Finn]

From where I sit, I don't really think about it too much. Like others have said, the incentives aren't really worth it for me to get excited for (though the deployment is still nice), and I wasn't a fan of the drama it caused in the beginning of the year. For me, if we happen to win, it's a nice bonus, and if we don't, I don't pay it much attention.

I think the idea of showing off a battalion for excelling and doing well is a great thing. I think the competition makes it worse. I think it'd be better to just say that you're showing off a good battalion, and keep the format largely the same. That way you can still track stats on battalions like you do now, but since it's not a contest, it doesn't become a rat race, and there's not as strong a feeling of disappointment if you aren't selected.

[Mystic]

19 minutes ago, KaiserNeiner said:

One of our biggest achievements internally this month was the recruitment number. Since 2018, the record number for 212th recruits in a month was 135. Once we started getting close to that number, I pushed our guys to break it, not based on BOTM, but based on setting a monumental record within our own batt. I hope I get to see the day that that record is broken again at 157. 

I get that but at the end of the day its still numbers. It's honestly fairly safe to say that no other battalion matches your guys records. 212th has always been filled with hard working members that want the best with their battalion.. Plenty of battalions have been hitting all time highs, 212th just has the massive numbers to make theirs known server wide. I blanked on the outpost rotation part that Marvel wrote up. The triple digit numbers put my mind off, im of course not doubting the selection, 212th has been popping off. With 212ths and 501st's canon popularity It's just a common feeling it seems among people outside of said battalions. 

This is gonna happen regardless ofc. There is never gonna be a solution to that as you have to treat everyone fairly regardless of their statuses. Congratulations on breaking your guys recruitment record.

 

 

25 minutes ago, Marvel said:

We did not and do not ever look at 212th and say eh might as well give it to them they are so much large than everyone else and give it to them overall battalion size has nothing to do with our decision. Every battalion is different we don't look at a roster and say omg they have this many people they get BOTM. That just makes no sense. To reiterate what I said on my post btw

"have made a large push for in-game engagement and roleplay with their newly introduced Outpost Schedule system, and have been extremely active, engaged, and cooperative with the rest of the server." Not once did I say the only reason they got it was their record breaking recruitment numbers. That was one of the reasons sure but it definitely was not the only reason.

I never stated you guys just look at 212th and say that. It was from an outside looking in perspective. Seeing the largest battalion win it multiple times is a feeling that plenty of people share bitterness at. Battalions like 41st or CG or 21st will never achieve the numbers 212th has. That's just how it is. If 212th keeps going up like i hope they do, it just kinda demotivates other battalions. Which is essentially the feedback ive been trying to give but couldn't figure out correct wording. 

It's like an army of 20 going against an army of 200. It's a futile attempt. When 212th is everywhere on the server with great leadership and massive interactions between themselves with all their new recruits its really demoralizing to small battalions going through rough spots that just have to worry about their NCOs or Officers wanting to do anything to help the battalion or even doing their quota.  This is the 2nd place feeling i was referring to. Even if you cant win back to back people know 212th would be #1 in terms of everything. 

I really can't describe it all too well via typing.  I didn't mean to insinuate that you guys default to giving 212th BOTM just based purely off numbers, it was just the quickest example i could use as they are the shining stars in terms of numbers and consistency on server. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Mystic

[KaiserNeiner]

17 minutes ago, Mystic said:

Battalions like 41st or CG or 21st will never achieve the numbers 212th has. 

It's like an army of 20 going against an army of 200.

I think think is where quality over quantity comes in play. There are so many more factors to BOTM than just numbers, or 212th would win it every month they could. Other battalions shine in other ways that make them unique and excellent, and when that’s celebrated in BOTM it’s an amazing thing. 

 

The best example is 21st. To be blunt, the 21st was in a horrible position at the start of the year. With new leadership, good activity, and overall server engagement, they finally started coming back a bit more over the summer. EVERYONE was rooting for them, so much so that some of our guys were hyping up 21st and showing new recruits to the door. I built the recruitment booth for them when that phase started back up for all the battalions. In that month, the whole server rallied behind 21st. Their BOTM status was one of the most well deserved ones all year based on how much their battalion changed and improved over time, and how much it really shone in October. 
 

Numbers are gonna be on lock for larger battalions like 212th, 501st, and Rancor. A smaller battalion’s effort to overcome that deficit with a higher quality of RP, trainings, improvements, and just overall engagement with the server can take them over that barrier and put them at the top. 

[Mystic]

6 hours ago, KaiserNeiner said:

I think think is where quality over quantity comes in play. There are so many more factors to BOTM than just numbers, or 212th would win it every month they could. Other battalions shine in other ways that make them unique and excellent, and when that’s celebrated in BOTM it’s an amazing thing. 

 

The best example is 21st. To be blunt, the 21st was in a horrible position at the start of the year. With new leadership, good activity, and overall server engagement, they finally started coming back a bit more over the summer. EVERYONE was rooting for them, so much so that some of our guys were hyping up 21st and showing new recruits to the door. I built the recruitment booth for them when that phase started back up for all the battalions. In that month, the whole server rallied behind 21st. Their BOTM status was one of the most well deserved ones all year based on how much their battalion changed and improved over time, and how much it really shone in October. 
 

Numbers are gonna be on lock for larger battalions like 212th, 501st, and Rancor. A smaller battalion’s effort to overcome that deficit with a higher quality of RP, trainings, improvements, and just overall engagement with the server can take them over that barrier and put them at the top. 

I agree. Overall my long ass rambles are just feedback I've heard around the server I figured I'd share. Seems like people are less and less vocal these days when Feedback posts roll around.

 

Unrelated to this reply to you Kaiser,

 

I feel like BOTM is really just about the name. Much like Jedi rewards permanent and temporary titles, this is like a crowning achievement on a BCMDs belt. I think the incentives may need redone as others have said, the Hanger is never used. Stand is just meh tbh and the deployments aren't anything special anymore since we deploy almost daily nowadays. 

 

May be worth looking at new rewards. I'll update the post with some ideas when I wake up .

[Hanz]

12 hours ago, Marvel said:

t... promotes trainings... and that's a problem? Requirements were not created because of BOTM. Requirements have quite literally existed for years. Requiring officers to do things also just isn't ridiculous they should be expected to do things regardless. Also I have no control over the return of Event Server so please do not correlate that with BOTM and bash BOTM because of that. Me creating BOTM deployments is what got our foot in the door for ES to return even if it was once a month. Now we use it more than that but regardless the status of Event Server is a completely different topic.

Yes it is a problem. Trainings are boring and they are all recycled garbage. I can count on one hand the number of trainings I have done where I had fun at all (FFAs are fun though). 

I didn't say it created requirements, but it reinforces them. Requiring officers to do weekly shitty trainings is very ridiculous. That should be the job of NCOs with officers being there to evaluate and help those NCOs. 

I am not blaming you for the event server being gone. Its a good reward for what you were given, but for older players that remember weekly deployments with your battalion (Conrad's 501st, ty shockpoint) then it doesn't seem special to you at all. (This is not me trying to say older players should be pandered to over newer players)

[Edgar]

NGL I ain't read anything stated above, offer credits for BOTM fr

[Tec]

11 minutes ago, Edgar said:

NGL I ain't read anything stated above, offer credits for BOTM fr

also based but include Factions! come on Edgar say it with me!

[Hector]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:12 PM, Mystic said:

It also gives certain people a weird elitism kick. 

agreed

[Gohn]

All i am saying is i enjoyed both participating in a BOTM Deployment and hosting one. I see a lot of you guys saying we get the event server so often now it's not special. But the diffrence is you get to go on the event server with a deployment especially planned out for you and your battalion. Sometimes you recreate a clonewars episode which is sick, and sometimes you go on flatgrass with a custom dupe and in my top 5 events I have been apart of almost all of them have been on flatgrass where you get to experience a "new" map. So I wouldn't say that getting deployed to the event server for winning BOTM Is some kind of "small" reward.

[Brooklyn]

I think if we are at the point where we are hitting 95+ on a daily basis, I don't see why we shouldn't be considering the possibility of Regimental Deployments. Yeah, you can make the argument that it pulls too much pop, but it would be highly enjoyable to have these once a month instead of solo bat deployments. That and it takes a bigger load off of main server deployments which people are always bitching about